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
▪ Abstract Here we review the biology of early generation neopolyploids and discuss the profound changes that accompany their formation. Newly formed auto- and allopolyploids exhibit considerable meiotic complexity, including multivalent pairing, multisomic inheritance, and the production of unbalanced gametes. The cytogenetic behavior of allopolyploids and autopolyploids differ statistically, but are more similar than commonly believed. The progeny of neopolyploids include a high frequency of aneuploids, pseudoeuploids and homeologue-recombinant genotypes that may contribute to the phenotypic variability observed in early generation polyploids. We find no evidence to support the traditional view that autopolyploids possess lower fertility than allopolyploids, casting doubt on the paradigm that allopolyploids should be more frequent due to their inherent fertility. The fertility of early generation polyploids increases rapidly, owing largely to selection against meiotic configurations that generate unbalanced gametes. Neopolyploids are commonly differentiated from progenitors by a combination of morphological, phenological and life-history characteristics. Further progress toward understanding polyploid evolution will require studies in natural populations that can evaluate the demographic and larger ecological significance of the cytogenetic and phenotypic character of neopolyploids.
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