MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099382802 · doi:10.1109/cibcb.2012.6217232

A model of competitive exclusion in plants

2012· article· en· W2099382802 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel Ashlock, Erin Wild

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEvolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGridCluster analysisProjection (relational algebra)Production (economics)Computer scienceGrid cellGenetic algorithmVariety (cybernetics)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grid plants are a simple artificial organism that models competitive exclusion in annual plants. Simulated plants that grow only from their tip are placed on a toroidal grid. They grow according to genetic plans that are expressed, limited by both energy and other plants. Once a plant has occupied a cell of the grid, no other may, so that the plants are competing for space. The algorithm simulates reproduction for 1000 model years under differing conditions. The final populations of plants are compared using a variety of tools including agent case embeddings, non-linear projection, and hierarchical clustering. It is found the plants adapt strongly to the differing conditions with higher seed mortality rates corresponding to more aggressive seed production. Performance of the plants is visualized in a number of ways and suggestions are made for generalizing and applying the model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEvolutionary Game Theory and CooperationFrench-language works237,207