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
Abstract A survey of fig viruses was conducted from 2010 to 2012 on individual fig trees from outdoor gardens showing different symptoms associated with fig mosaic disease. A total of 30 fig leaf samples were collected from eight different provinces of mainland Spain and tested by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction ( RT ‐ PCR ) to assess the presence of fig mosaic virus ( FMV ), fig leaf mottle‐associated virus 1 ( FLM aV‐1), fig leaf mottle‐associated virus 2 ( FLM aV‐2), fig mild mottle‐associated virus ( FMM aV), fig latent virus 1 ( FLV ‐1) and Fig fleck‐associated virus ( FF kaV). The 96.7% (29 samples of 30) of the analysed samples were infected with FMV , 16.7% (5 of 30) with FLM aV‐1 and 26.7% (8 of 30) with FMM aV, whereas all samples were negative for FLM aV‐2, FLV ‐1 and FF kaV. Mixed infection was observed in 13 samples. Sequencing analyses results showed that FMV , FMM aV and FLM aV‐1 Spanish isolates shared 89–93% nt identity with other Mediterranean isolates of the same viruses. Phylogenetic analyses of the amplified RdRp fragment from the FMV grouped the Spanish isolates into a subgroup together with Japanese, Canadian and some Serbian and Turkish isolates. To our knowledge, this is the first report of FMV , FMM aV and FLM aV‐1 occurring in mainland Spain.
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) | 0.000 | 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