MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992219799 · doi:10.1159/000213209

Spontaneous Activity Level and Life Span in Rotifers: Lack of Support for the Rate of Living Theory

2009· article· en· W1992219799 on OpenAlexaff
Hildegard E. Enesco, Alison McTavish, Riccardo Garberi

Bibliographic record

VenueGerontology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife spanBiologyPositive correlationLongevitySpan (engineering)EcologyDemographyGerontologyMedicineEvolutionary biologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spontaneous activity level was measured in rotifers of the species Asplanchna brightwelli on each day of their 5-day life span. No correlation was seen in group data between activity level and life span. However, data from individuals showed a positive correlation between life span and activity level in the latter half of the life span on 3 days out of 5. This tendency toward greater activity in the longer-lived rotifers is not consistent with the rate of living theory of aging.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGerontologySame topicEnvironmental Toxicology and EcotoxicologyFrench-language works237,207