MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996503485 · doi:10.1002/cav.26

Physically‐based simulation of plant leaf growth

2004· article· en· W1996503485 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Animation and Virtual Worlds · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGreenhouse Technology and Climate Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlant growthProcess (computing)Computer scienceGrowth rateComputer simulationSet (abstract data type)CompressibilityAnimationBiological systemMechanicsSimulationMathematicsGeometryBotanyPhysicsBiologyComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A mathematical model is presented to simulate the growth of a plant leaf. The tissue in the leaf has been regarded as a viscous, incompressible fluid whose 2D expansion comes from the non‐zero specific growth rate in area. The resulting system of equations are composed of the modified Navier‐Stokes equations. The level set method is used to capture the expanding leaf front. Numerical simulations indicate that different portions of the leaf expand at different rates, which is consistent with the biological observations in the growth of a plant leaf. Numerical results for the case of the Xanthium leaf growth are also presented. A standard ray tracing technique is applied to produce an animation simulating the leaf growth process of three days. The key results with their physical and practical implications are discussed. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.565
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.201 · 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