Bibliographic record
Abstract
I t is a matter of common observation that no family of flowering plants includes so great a number of individuals as the Gramineae—a fact which seems in part accounted for by their extraordinarily prolific and effective seeding. There are a number of detailed records confirming this general impression. As long ago as 1660, Sir Kenelm Digby related that the “Fathers of the Christian Doctrine at Paris doe still keep by them for a Monument (and indeed it is an admirable one) a Plant of Barley consisting of 249. stalkes, Springing from one Root or Grain of Barley, in which they counted above 18000. Grains or seeds of Barley”. Later in the seventeenth century, Thomas Everard recorded that from one grain of Wheat he had obtained eighty ears and above 4000 grains. Seeding on this scale may lead to a rapidity of increase which seems almost miraculous. A few years ago the chief kind of Wheat grown in Canada was that known as ‘Marquis’. One grain of Marquis was planted in an experimental plot at Ottawa in the spring of 1903, and in 1918, from the progeny of this grain after fifteen years, 300,000,000 bushels of Wheat were produced in Canada and the United States. In the grasses there is normally a period of seed-rest before germination. The whole subject of seed-rest, and the related problem of delayed germination, seem to need a thorough comparative study, for our present knowledge of these questions is only complete enough to reveal much obscurity.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.005 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".