MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797700484 · doi:10.1002/yea.3307

Introducing ‘ecoYeast’: ecology and communities of yeasts

2018· editorial· en· W2797700484 on OpenAlex
Marc‐André Lachance, Chris Todd Hittinger

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

VenueYeast · 2018
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicYeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyEcologyYeastMicrobial ecologyMetagenomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Building on the success of the Yeast Primer series, the ecoYeast collection of invited reviews begins in this issue with an article by Irene Stefanini on the ecology of yeasts associated with insects. In keeping with the desire to feature research on a broad diversity of potential model organisms, often (and oddly) referred to as ‘non-conventional’ yeasts, Yeast’s Editorial Board wishes to headline emerging knowledge of yeast ecology. ecoYeast will focus on yeast-rich communities found in both natural and anthropogenic habitats. Rather than report on specific yeasts, reviews will cover aquatic or terrestrial habitats such as the sea, the soil, the plant–insect interface or methanol-rich substrates, as well as domestic realms, such as the vineyard and other agricultural settings, the clinical microbiome, the cheese house, the bakery or the brewery. We are grateful for the generous reception met by our invitation to experts in yeast ecology to provide these timely summaries. Readers can expect a dozen or so such articles to appear in the next several months. The Yeast Primer series will continue to offer invited reviews that are focused on specific emerging or non-conventional model yeasts, including our recent emphasis on model clades and genera.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.911

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.233 · 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