Bibliographic record
Abstract
The forced silking of a spider to obtain major ampullate (MA) silk for experiments is a standard practice; however, this method may have profound effects on the resulting silk's properties. Experiments were performed to determine the magnitude of the difference in the forces required to draw silk from the MA gland between unrestrained spiders descending on their draglines and restrained spiders from which MA silk was drawn with a motor. The results show that freely falling spiders can spool silk with as little as 0.1 body weights of force, which generates a stress that is about 2% of the silk's tensile strength. In contrast, forcibly silked spiders apply as much as 4 body weights of force with an internal braking mechanism, and this force creates silk stresses in excess of 50% of the silk's tensile strength. The large forces observed in forced silking should strongly affect the draw alignment of the polymer network in the newly spun fibers, and this may account for the differences in material properties observed between naturally spun and forcibly spun MA silks. In addition, the heat produced by the internal friction brake during forced silking may set the upper limit of forced silking speed.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".