Thesis, deconstruction and new synthesis: the changing face of applied pollination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A quarter millennium of the changing face of pollination biology from 18th Century discovery (thesis) to 21st Century crisis is presented in six overlapping, interdigitating facets. Pollination biology was not regarded as serious science at its onset, but acceptance of the Darwinian theory of evolution has shown its biological value. Disciplinary issues in pollination (i.e. deconstruction) have produced a wealth of knowledge but with botanical and zoological solitudes. At the same time botany and zoology tend to be separate within agronomy and apiculture. Philosophical, social, scientific, technical, political and business agendas have variously hampered, and continue to hamper, objective science in each facet. Nevertheless, interdisciplinary approaches to pollination ecology, its inherent co-evolutionary principles, and the current “pollination” crisis have become a scientific and social unifying force that cannot but lead to new knowledge, insights and, I hope, wisdom (new synthesis).
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".