Proceedings of the International Symposium Ecology of Aphidophaga
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This series of symposia has traditionally been a unique scientific forum for discussions on ecological and behavioural interactions within the guild of insects feeding on aphids. Its focus is to understand how natural control works, with the aim to improve it. After the initial two meetings in Czechoslovakia, symposia were organised in Poland, Hungary, France, Belgium, Canada and Portugal. The ninth meeting was held once again in the Czech Republic.Details on history of the meetings, with bibliographic data from all Proceedings, can be found at . News will appear there continually.This issue is the outcome of the 9th meeting that was attended by 56 participants from 21 countries. Abstracts of the presentations not included in this issue appeared under ISBN 80-86668-02-09, Ecology of Aphidophaga 9, Abstracts, 2004, Inst. Entomol. Acad. Sci. Czech Rep., 92 pp.We look forward to the 10th meeting in 2007 that will be organised by N. Kavallieratos, E. Lucas and J.P. Michaud.July 10, 2005The Editors
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.097 | 0.036 |
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".