MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2222681139 · doi:10.1242/jeb.131755

Convergence of joint mechanics in independently evolving, articulated coralline algae

2015· article· en· W2222681139 on OpenAlexafffund
Kyra Janot, Patrick T. Martone

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaPhycological Society of AmericaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsConvergence (economics)Joint (building)Cognitive scienceComputer sciencePsychologyEngineeringStructural engineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Flexible joints are a key innovation in the evolution of upright coralline algae. These structures have evolved in parallel at least three separate times, allowing the otherwise rigid, calcified thalli of upright corallines to achieve flexibility when subjected to hydrodynamic stress. As all bending occurs at the joints, stress is amplified, which necessitates that joints be made of material that is both extensible and strong. Data presented here indicate that coralline joints are in fact often stronger and more extensible, as well as tougher, than fleshy seaweed tissues. Corallinoids are particularly strong and tough, which is largely due to the presence of secondary cell walls that strengthen the joint tissue without adding bulk to the joint itself. Cell wall thickness is shown to be a large contributing factor to strength across all groups, with the exception of the corallinoid Cheilosporum sagittatum, which likely possesses distinct chemical composition in its walls to increase strength beyond that of all other species tested.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations21
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BiologySame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207