Comparisons of swimming performance in rainbow trout using constant acceleration and critical swimming speed tests
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
Maximum swimming performance of seasonally acclimated rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss was compared among short‐duration constant acceleration tests ( U max ) and with the well established, but longer duration critical swimming speed ( U crit ) test. The present results show that U max was insensitive to a range of acceleration rates that differed by more than three‐fold. Thus, test duration could be reduced from 58 to 18 min without affecting the estimate of U max . The value of U max , however, was up to 57% higher than U crit . Only the slowest acceleration rate tested (an increase of 1 cm s −1 every min) had a significantly lower U max , and this was up to 19% higher than U crit . Even so, the potential saving in the test duration was small (70 v. 90 min) when compared with a ramp‐ U crit test (a standard U crit test but with the water velocity initially ramped to c . 50% of the estimated U crit ). Therefore, swim tests that are appreciably shorter in duration than a ramp‐ U crit test result in U max being appreciably greater than U crit . An additional discovery was that the ramp‐ U crit performance of cold‐acclimated rainbow trout was independent of the recovery period between tests. These results may prove useful in making comparisons among different swim test protocols and in designing swim tests that assess fish health and toxicological impacts.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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