MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140923254 · doi:10.3368/er.32.2.137

Evaluation of Five Herbicide Treatments to Control Yellow Toadflax (<i>Linaria vulgaris</i>)

2014· article· en· W2140923254 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Randy D. Johnson, Troy W. Grovenburg, Lora B. Perkins, Jonathan A. Jenks, Will M. Inselman, Christopher C. Swanson

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Restoration · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAllelopathy and phytotoxic interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Yellow toadflax {Linaria vulgaris) is an invasive weed of rangelands, forests, and croplands in North America and a common problem for land managers (Wilson et al. 2005). Endemic to central Europe and the Mediterranean region, yellow toadflax was intentionally introduced to North America during the 1800s (Wilson et al. 2005) as an ornamental, a fabric dye, and for ethnobotanical ,use. The species escaped cultivation and has become an opportunistic invader throughout the continental United States, Canada, and parts of Mexico (Jacobs and Sing 2006). Yellow toadflax has been legally designated as a noxious weed in much of western North America (USDA 2013); it thrives in disturbed, open habitats and can easily dominate native or desirable plant communities (Wilson et al. 2005).

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological RestorationSame topicAllelopathy and phytotoxic interactionsFrench-language works237,207