Variation in the intraspecific relationship between fish length and intensity of parasitic infection: biological and statistical causes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a meta‐analysis, the overall mean correlation between fish length and the intensity of parasitic infections derived from 76 different host–parasite species was positive but weak and non‐significant, following corrections for sample size. Whether the parasites were acquired by ingestion or by skin contact had no influence on the strength of the relationship. For cestodes, larval digeneans, and gnathiid isopods, however, the mean correlation between fish length and intensity of infection was significant. Some statistical parameters influenced the strength of the raw correlations computed within samples and thus led to over‐ or under‐estimation of the true relationship. Sample size correlated negatively with the value of the correlation coefficients, whereas range in both fish lengths and intensities of infection correlated positively with the value of the correlation coefficients. Distinguishing between statistical noise and the biological processes shaping the size v. intensity relationship will be important if this relationship is to be incorporated into fish population models.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it