MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2515743078 · doi:10.1093/ae/tmw045

Following the Wild Bees: The Craft and Science of Bee Hunting

2016· article· en· W2515743078 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Entomologist · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCraftHoney beeHoney BeesSightVisual artsEcologyGeographyZoologyArtBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following the Wild Bees: The Craft and Science of Bee Hunting Thomas D. Seeley 2016; 184 pages, 50 color illustrations Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ ISBN: 978-1-400880-33-1 $22.95 (hardcover) ![Graphic][1] In the summer of 1975, I traveled to French Guiana to study “killer bees.” Disappointed that only a handful of swarms had colonized the trap nests he installed six months earlier, my advisor, Chip Taylor, decided we should try “bee lining.” We bought a jar of honey and headed to a nearby park. We caught several honey bees on flowers, enclosed them in a cup containing diluted honey, set the cup on the hood of our rented car, and removed the cover. I'd learned a bit about the recruitment dances performed by successful foragers but had no idea what to expect from our exercise. The bees finished feeding, circled the feeder, and flew from sight. To our amazement, a bee … [1]: /embed/inline-graphic-1.gif

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.708
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.211 · 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