MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2761571882 · doi:10.22543/0090-0222.1234

Genetic Differences in Resistance of Scotch Pine to Eastern Pineshoot Borer

2017· article· en· W2761571882 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Great Lakes Entomologist · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Insect Ecology and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyRange (aeronautics)AdaptabilityResistance (ecology)Pinus <genus>PEST analysisBotanyAgronomyEcologyHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(excerpt) Scotch pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) is the most common plantation Christmas tree in the northeastern United States. In its large native range, covering much of Europe and Asia, this species is valued highly for timber. Its adaptability to various sites and uses is partly a result of its high degree of genetic variability. For example, varieties differ widely in cold resistance, winter foliage color, growth rate, and needle length. Unfortunately, however, Scotch pine may be damaged by several insect pests. One of these is eastern pineshoot borer (Eucosma gloriola Heinrich). According to Drooz (1960), this insect is native to the area east of the Rocky Mountains in Canada and the northern United States, and attacks many important conifers. Its favorite hosts are Scotch pine and eastern white pine (Pinus strobus L.).

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.227 · 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