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
A striking phenomenon unique to the kingdom of plants is the regular arrangement of lateral organs around a central axis, known as phyllotaxis. Recent molecular-genetic experiments indicate that active transport of the plant hormone auxin is the key process regulating phyllotaxis. A conceptual model based on these experiments, introduced by Reinhardt et al. [Reinhardt, D., Pesce, E. R., Stieger, P., Mandel, T., Baltensperger, K., et al. (2003) Nature 426, 255-260], provides an intuitively plausible interpretation of the data, but raises questions of whether the proposed mechanism is, in fact, capable of producing the observed temporal and spatial patterns, is robust, can start de novo, and can account for phyllotactic transitions, such as the frequently observed transition from decussate to spiral phyllotaxis. To answer these questions, we created a computer simulation model based on data described previously or in this paper and reasonable hypotheses. The model reproduces, within the standard error, the divergence angles measured in Arabidopsis seedlings and the effects of selected experimental manipulations. It also reproduces distichous, decussate, and tricussate patterns. The model thus offers a plausible link between molecular mechanisms of morphogenesis and the geometry of phyllotaxis.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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