MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008837006 · doi:10.3390/j3010008

Sensitivity of Planaria to Weak, Patterned Electric Current and the Subsequent Correlative Interactions with Fluctuations in the Intensity of the Magnetic Field of Earth

2020· article· en· W3008837006 on OpenAlexaff
Victoria L. Hossack, Michael A. Persinger, Blake T. Dotta

Bibliographic record

VenueJ — Multidisciplinary Scientific Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMagnetic and Electromagnetic Effects
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlanariaElectric fieldPopulationEarth's magnetic fieldCurrent (fluid)Magnetic fieldPhysicsBiologyRegeneration (biology)Medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some species of fish show highly evolved mechanisms by which they can detect exogenous electric and magnetic fields. The detection of electromagnetic fields has been hypothesized to exist in humans, despite the lack of specialized sensors. In this experiment, planaria were tested in a t-maze with weak electric current pulsed in one arm to determine if the planaria showed any indication of being able to detect it. It was found that a small proportion of the population seemed to be attracted to this current. Additionally, if the experiment was preceded by a geomagnetic storm, the planaria showed a linear correlation increase in the variability of their movement in response to the presence of the weak electric field. Both of these results indicate that a subpopulation of planaria show some ability to respond to electromagnetic fields.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJ — Multidisciplinary Scientific JournalSame topicMagnetic and Electromagnetic EffectsFrench-language works237,207