Bibliographic record
Abstract
2008 was an eventful inaugural year for Evolutionary Applications. We published four issues comprising 45 papers in total, including the special issue: Evolutionary Perspectives on Salmonid Conservation and Management. Wiley-Blackwell sponsored an Evolutionary Applications symposium at the Canadian Society of Ecology and Evolution annual meeting in Vancouver (May), and hosted an official Evolutionary Applications launch reception at the SSE annual meeting in Minneapolis (June). The journal received much press coverage, and was featured in both Nature and New Scientist. The year was successfully capped with the acceptance of the journal for full indexing in ISI. The Editorial team would like to thank the scientific community for their overwhelming support of this new and unique journal. Undoubtedly this support, as well as the official endorsement of the journal by both the Society for the Study of Evolution, and the European Society for Evolutionary Biology (ESEB), contributed to the exceptionally rapid acceptance of the journal into ISI. In 2008, Evolutionary Applications published papers in most of the fields listed on our website (http://www.evolutionaryapplications.org; see Table 1). Published papers also focused on a wide diversity of organisms of applied importance, including plants, animals and microbes (Table 2). Clearly, the journal is fulfilling its primary goal of being the principal outlet for the increasing number of high-quality papers using evolutionary concepts to address issues of economic, medical and social relevance. In 2009, we are again publishing four issues, including this current special issue on evolutionary medicine, and an upcoming special issue on the impact of harvesting on fish evolution and Darwinian fishery science. Among other events, in August, Wiley-Blackwell will be sponsoring a full-day symposium on evolutionary applications at the 12th ESEB Congress in Turin, Italy. Despite being in our first year of operation, we succeeded in maintaining a very short time from submission to first decision (34 days). Also, our transparent online review and production system allows authors to track the progress of their manuscripts from submission to publication. We will continue striving both to publish the highest quality research on applied evolution, and to make the importance and broad relevance of evolutionary biology more accessible to all interested readers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".