Goodwill hunting: dragon hunters, dragonflies and leisure
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 Asia, insects have a long history of being a part of recreation and tourism activities, with some species such as rhinoceros beetles and dragonflies being raised as pets. While the role of insects in recreation and tourism (i.e. dragonfly gatherings, educational outings) is somewhat more modest in North America, Europe, and Australia, some of these activities are increasing in popularity. The availability of field guides, associations, and websites is helping to facilitate the growth of these leisure activities, and more specifically the viewing of Odonata (i.e. dragonflies, damselflies). Participant observations and interviews were used to provide an empirical understanding of how one particular insect order – Odonata attracts participants to recreation and tourism activities, fosters interests, and creates controversies (e.g. collecting). A theoretical framework provided by naturework, an interpretivsitic approach developed by Fine [(2003). Morel tales: The culture of mushrooming. University of Illinois Press.] is used to understand the philosophies involved in dragonflying. The conclusion highlights how new forms of recreation and tourism activities can promote greater awareness of insects.
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