MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2776889635

The L-system-based plant-modeling environment L-studio 4.0

2004· article· en· W2776889635 on OpenAlexaffabout
Radoslaw Karwowski, Przemysław Prusinkiewicz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGreenhouse Technology and Climate Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStudioComputer scienceOperating systemInterface (matter)Graphical user interfaceMicrosoft Visual StudioVirtual machineUser interfaceSet (abstract data type)Microsoft WindowsSoftware engineeringHuman–computer interactionComputer graphics (images)Programming languageSoftware
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L-studio and the Virtual Laboratory (Vlab) are two related plant modeling packages developed at the University of Calgary, Canada. They have been distributed by this University since 1999. The packages run on Windows and Linux machines, respectively, have similar functionality, and support the exchange of models between both systems. The main difference between these systems is the user interface, which is designed to meet the different expectations of Windows or Linux users. Below we outline the most recent version of L-studio (4.0) (Fig. 1). The package consists of: (a) two L-system-based simulation programs, cpfg and lpfg; (b) a modeling environment that provides auxiliary modeling tools; (c) a library of programs for simulating environmental processes that affect plant development; (d) a set of sample models; and (e) a graphical browser for organizing and accessing models on both local and remote machines.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0360.013

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.152 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations67
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGreenhouse Technology and Climate ControlFrench-language works237,207