MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942210964 · doi:10.1139/facets-2018-0038

Bed bugs: The move to humans as hosts

2019· article· en· W2942210964 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Benoit Talbot, Nusha Keyghobadi, M. Brock Fenton

Bibliographic record

VenueFACETS · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDermatological diseases and infestations
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyInsectivoreEcologyHomeothermyRange (aeronautics)Host (biology)ZoologyPredation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cimicid insects, bed bugs and their allies, include about 100 species of blood-feeding ectoparasites. Among them, a few have become widespread and abundant pests of humans. Cimicids vary in their degree of specialization to hosts. Whereas most species specialize on insectivorous birds or bats, the common bed bug can feed on a range of distantly related host species, such as bats, humans, and chickens. We suggest that association with humans and generalism in bed bugs led to fundamentally different living conditions that fostered rapid growth and expansion of their populations. We propose that the evolutionary and ecological success of common bed bugs reflected exploitation of large homeothermic hosts (humans) that sheltered in buildings. This was a departure from congeners whose hosts are much smaller and often heterothermic. We argue that interesting insights into the biology of pest species may be obtained using an integrated view of their ecology and evolution.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.305
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFACETSSame topicDermatological diseases and infestationsFrench-language works237,207