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
Approximately 185,000 Gossypium EST sequences comprising >94,800,000 nucleotides were amassed from 30 cDNA libraries constructed from a variety of tissues and organs under a range of conditions, including drought stress and pathogen challenges. These libraries were derived from allopolyploid cotton (Gossypium hirsutum; A(T) and D(T) genomes) as well as its two diploid progenitors, Gossypium arboreum (A genome) and Gossypium raimondii (D genome). ESTs were assembled using the Program for Assembling and Viewing ESTs (PAVE), resulting in 22,030 contigs and 29,077 singletons (51,107 unigenes). Further comparisons among the singletons and contigs led to recognition of 33,665 exemplar sequences that represent a nonredundant set of putative Gossypium genes containing partial or full-length coding regions and usually one or two UTRs. The assembly, along with their UniProt BLASTX hits, GO annotation, and Pfam analysis results, are freely accessible as a public resource for cotton genomics. Because ESTs from diploid and allotetraploid Gossypium were combined in a single assembly, we were in many cases able to bioinformatically distinguish duplicated genes in allotetraploid cotton and assign them to either the A or D genome. The assembly and associated information provide a framework for future investigation of cotton functional and evolutionary genomics.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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