Bibliographic record
Abstract
Four tulip cultivars were introduced from Holland.Their botanical characteristics,phonological period,growth and propagation were investigated and compared.The results showed that bulb of cultivar-Large Copper were short and with longest hair on stem.Membranous scales of cultivar-Toronto were nacarat and lackluster,leaf with rufous stripe.The bulb of cultivar-Toronto was highest and weightiest,and flower diameter,corolla height,inner and outer petal length,pistil height,anther length and filament length were biggest,but inner and outer petal was most narrow.The cultivar-Pink Impression was tallest and with longer and wider leaf.Tulip sprouted in the early of April in the open field in Shenyang,and spread leaf after a week.Flower bud emerged in the late of April.Generally blooming was in the early of May and with about a ten-days florescence.Florescence of cultivar-Toronto was only a week,but which of cultivar-Apricot Beauty was up to two weeks.Tulip grew fast from flower bud emergence to full blooming period.The bulb propagation coefficient of cultivar-Apricot Beauty was highest(4.91).The yield of largest bulblet of cultivarPink Impression was higher and reached to 31.1%.
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".