MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783262210 · doi:10.22630/pniks.2017.26.4.45

Taxonomic classification of algae by the use of chlorophyll a fluorescence

2017· article· en· W2783262210 on OpenAlexaff
Nikodem Szymański, Piotr Dąbrowski, Hazem M. Kalaji, Detlev Lohse, Balaji Panchal, Magdalena Zabochnicka-Świątek

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Review Engineering and Environmental Sciences (SREES) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsFuture Earth
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlgaeAlgal bloomWater qualityEnvironmental scienceChlorophyll fluorescenceChlorophyll aAquatic ecosystemChlorophyllEnvironmental chemistryEcologyBiologyBotanyPhytoplanktonChemistryNutrient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Natural water reservoirs are very important ecosystems thus they should be under continuous monitoring and protection. In water of low quality, the algal blooms develop develops vastly. The knowledge of algal species composition is necessary for understanding this process. There are a few traditional group-specific methods of microalgae classification, but they are often labour-intense and time-consuming. Moreover, the samples must be prepared and/or collected before getting any results. Non-invasive chlorophyll fluorescence analysis offers an alternative approach and potentially allows in situ estimation of algal concentration. In this work the fluorometric methods to estimate algae content in water and to differentiate algal populations is presented.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Review Engineering and Environmental Sciences (SREES)Same topicWater Quality Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207