MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070737035 · doi:10.3109/15368378.2011.587928

Planarian activity differences when maintained in water pre-treated with magnetic fields: a nonlinear effect

2011· article· en· W2070737035 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

VenueElectromagnetic Biology and Medicine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMagnetic and Electromagnetic Effects
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlanarianNonlinear systemIntensity (physics)Magnetic fieldDiffusionField intensityChemistryBiologyAnimal scienceEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceNuclear magnetic resonancePhysicsRegeneration (biology)OpticsThermodynamicsCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There have been multiple claims that exposing water to a static magnetic field affects its properties which influence living systems. To test this hypothesis, planarian subsequent to dissection were maintained in spring water that had been previously exposed for only one day to one of three (16, 160, or 1,600 G) intensity static magnetic fields or to a reference condition. Although there was no significant difference in regeneration rates over the subsequent seven-day period, there was a statistically significant nonlinear effect for planarian mobility and diffusion rates. Both mobility rates and diffusion velocity of a liquid within the water that had been exposed to the 16 G field was about twice that for water exposed to the other intensities. These results imply that nonlinear biophysical effects may emerge under specific conditions of intensity ranges for particular volumes of water.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.600
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.215 · 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