<i>Proceedings B:</i> welcoming outstanding research of broad interest in all aspects of organismal biology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
You have accessMoreSectionsView PDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail Cite this article Hassell Michael P. 2012Proceedings B: welcoming outstanding research of broad interest in all aspects of organismal biologyProc. R. Soc. B.2791–2http://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2011.2012SectionYou have accessEditorialProceedings B: welcoming outstanding research of broad interest in all aspects of organismal biology Editor-in-Chief Michael P. Hassell Michael P. Hassell Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for more papers by this author Editor-in-Chief Michael P. Hassell Michael P. Hassell Google Scholar Find this author on PubMed Search for more papers by this author Published:19 October 2011https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2011.2012Time is flying at Proceedings B, at least for me, having now come to the end of my third year as editor-in-chief. Although the day-to-day procedures are now familiar, the challenges remain much the same: principally to try and seek out fascinating and important papers throughout the range of biology. Last year, 2011, was another great year for the journal. Submissions continued at a very high level and for the first time, the journal's Impact Factor went above 5, reaching 5.064.We have maintained our strength in core areas such as ecology, evolution and behaviour, while at the same time increasing the proportion of content in other areas such as environmental science and health and disease. Encouragingly, there is also now a much greater international spread of authors, with an increased proportion coming from the USA, Canada, Europe, Australia and Asia.The journal's rejection rate is now higher than ever, as we have had to become increasingly selective, and search for the most outstanding contributions. While this is a sign of ‘good health’, it is an unfortunate corollary that we increasingly have to turn away some very good papers that just fail to compete for space in the journal. Part of the attraction of the journal is the rapid turnaround times that we can achieve. This has improved during the past year with receipt to acceptance now at an average of 30 days (34 days in 2010) and receipt to online publication at an average of 63 days (66 days in 2010). As always, this is only achievable with the support of our excellent Editorial Board and the wonderful backup we all receive from the Royal Society Publishing team.There have been many research highlights appearing in the journal during the past year, and here are just a few of them. We published our first special feature, ‘Information processing in miniature brains’, guest edited by Associate Editor Lars Chittka [1], which covered a fascinating array of topics, including spatial memory, colour vision, attention, memory dynamics and sleep. Other highlights include papers such as ‘Vertical transmission of learned signatures in a wild parrot’ [2], ‘Expansion of mass-flowering crops leads to transient pollinator dilution and reduced wild plant pollination’ [3] and ‘Subretinal electronic chips allow blind patients to read letters and combine them to words’ [4], which together capture the huge diversity of subjects that Proceedings B covers, something that our readers often compliment us on.As always, our reviews are a key and an important feature of the journal and I would like to thank our Reviews Editor, Mike Siva-Jothy, for his continued dedication. Some examples from 2011 are the recent Canadian Society for Ecology and Evolution review, ‘Adaptation and habitat selection in the eco-evolutionary process’ [5], and the reviews by Alexander Badyaev [6], Edward Davis et al. [7] and that of Jiri Hulcr & Robert Dunn [8].Proceedings B is widely recognized for its focus on evolutionary biology, ecology and behaviour, but as always, we remain keen to attract papers of broad interest across the whole spectrum of biology. My fellow Editors and I will endeavour to ensure 2012 is an even better year for the journal and we look forward to receiving and reading your most outstanding contributions.FootnotesThis journal is © 2011 The Royal SocietyReferences1Chittka L.& Skorupski P.. 2011Information processing in miniature brains. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 885–888.doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.2699 (doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.2699). Link, ISI, Google Scholar2Berg K. S., Delgado S., Cortopassi K. A., Beissinger S. R.& Bradbury J. W.In press. Vertical transmission of learned signatures in a wild parrot. Proc. R. Soc. B.doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.0932 (doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.0932). Link, ISI, Google Scholar3Holzschuh A., Dormann C. F., Tscharntke T.& Steffan-Dewenter I.. 2011Expansion of mass-flowering crops leads to transient pollinator dilution and reduced wild plant pollination. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 3444–3451.doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.0268 (doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.0268). Link, ISI, Google Scholar4Zrenner E., et al.2011Subretinal electronic chips allow blind patients to read letters and combine them to words. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 1489–1497.doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.1747 (doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.1747). Link, ISI, Google Scholar5Morris D. W.. 2011Adaptation and habitat selection in the eco-evolutionary process. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 2401–2411.doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.0604 (doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.0604). Link, ISI, Google Scholar6Badyaev A. V.. 2011Origin of the fittest: link between emergent variation and evolutionary change as a critical question in evolutionary biology. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 1921–1929.doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.0548 (doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.0548). Link, ISI, Google Scholar7Davis E. B., Brakora K. A.& Lee A. H.. 2011Evolution of ruminant headgear: a review. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 2857–2865.doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.0938 (doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.0938). Link, ISI, Google Scholar8Hulcr J.& Dunn R. R.. 2011The sudden emergence of pathogenicity in insect–fungus symbioses threatens naive forest ecosystems. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 2866–2873.doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.1130 (doi:10.1098/rspb.2011.1130). Link, ISI, Google Scholar Next Article VIEW FULL TEXT DOWNLOAD PDF FiguresRelatedReferencesDetails This Issue07 January 2012Volume 279Issue 1726 Article InformationDOI:https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2011.2012PubMed:22012982Published by:Royal SocietyOnline ISSN:1471-2954History: Published online19/10/2011Published in print07/01/2012 License:This journal is © 2011 The Royal Society Citations and impact Subjectsecology Large datasets are available through Proceedings B's partnership with Dryad
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 | 0.005 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.666 | 0.576 |
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".