MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130381895 · doi:10.1098/rsos.202039

Revisiting the classification of squamate adhesive setae: historical, morphological and functional perspectives

2021· article· en· W3130381895 on OpenAlexafffund
Austin M. Garner, Anthony P. Russell

Bibliographic record

VenueRoyal Society Open Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSetaGeckoBiologyEvolutionary biologyZoologyGenus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research on gecko-based adhesion has become a truly interdisciplinary endeavour, encompassing many disciplines within the natural and physical sciences. Gecko adhesion occurs by the induction of van der Waals intermolecular (and possibly other) forces between substrata and integumentary filaments (setae) terminating in at least one spatulate tip. Gecko setae have increasingly been idealized as structures with uniform dimensions and a particular branching pattern. Approaches to developing synthetic simulacra have largely adopted such an idealized form as a foundational template. Observations of entire setal fields of geckos and anoles have, however, revealed extensive, predictable variation in setal form. Some filaments of these fields do not fulfil the morphological criteria that characterize setae and, problematically, recent authors have applied the term 'seta' to structurally simpler and likely non-adhesively competent fibrils. Herein we briefly review the history of the definition of squamate setae and propose a standardized classificatory scheme for epidermal outgrowths based on a combination of whole animal performance and morphology. Our review is by no means comprehensive of the literature regarding the form, function, and development of the adhesive setae of squamates and we do not address significant advances that have been made in many areas (e.g. cell biology of setae) that are largely tangential to their classification and identification. We contend that those who aspire to simulate the form and function of squamate setae will benefit from a fuller appreciation of the diversity of these structures, thereby assisting in the identification of features most relevant to their objectives.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRoyal Society Open ScienceSame topicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface InteractionsFrench-language works237,207