Magnitudinal Asymmetries in Seed Production in Vaccinium corymbosum: Anomaly or Not?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Analyses of the annual seed set taken from 208 shrubs of Vaccinium corymbosum at six locations in eastern North American from 1978 to 1999, showed that at each location, a group of individual plants retained the same rank among the others in the number of viable seeds produced per berry from year to year, and that the top five percent producers in the group produced approximately 25% of the total seed production, while on the low end a group of about half the plants contributed < 10% of the total. The relationship between the cumulative proportions of seed set per plant against the cumulative proportion of producers is consistent throughout the six locations, with some evidence of clustering of locations. At all locations, the proportion of seeds produced per plant or equivalently the total seed production per plant over the sampling period has right skewed distributions. At each location, the same proportion of plants produces the same proportion of seeds. The total number of seeds produced at each location are closely fitted by Weibull distributions with shape parameters less than 1, indicating that the more seeds a given plant has produced the more likely it will produce in the future.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".