MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000612017

Výskyt jmelí bílého (Viscum album) ve Frýdku-Místku

2016· article· cs· W3000612017 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lukáš Kovalčík

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature) · 2016
Typearticle
Languagecs
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany and Plant Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViscum albumForestryGeographyTraditional medicineMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The literary research which includes description of European mistletoe (Viscum album) was written according to available literature. It engages in botanical characteristics, morphological signs and physiology of mistletoe. There are also described the ways of dissemination of mistletoe, sorting of woody plants by their resistance to this hemiparasite. The next part of the thesis summarizes the damage caused by mistletoe, possible protection, and types of treatment of affected trees. Three localities in the city of Frýdek-Místek where woody plants, which are heavily affected by European mistletoe, occur were chosen for practical evaluation. There are these woody plants species present: Canadian popler (Populus x canadensis), small-leaved lime (Tilia cordata) and rowen (Sorbus aucuparia). During the research, the oldest mistletoe specimen was detected to be 20 years old. Differences between achievable ages of a hemiparasite and a host plant can be the cause, why affection by mistletoe leads to death of a host plant. The lowest age when mistletoe starts to affect woody plants is species specific and is between 11 and 30 years. Knowledge of this lowest age is important for determination of the time to start monitoring these trees.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature)Same topicBotany and Plant Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207