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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractPollen dispersal is a key evolutionary and ecological process, but the degree to which variation in the density of concurrently flowering conspecific plants (i.e., coflowering density) shapes pollination patterns remains understudied. We monitored coflowering density and corresponding pollination patterns of the insect-pollinated palm <i>Oenocarpus bataua</i> in northwestern Ecuador and found that the influence of coflowering density on these patterns was scale dependent: high neighborhood densities were associated with reductions in pollen dispersal distance and gametic diversity of progeny arrays, whereas we observed the opposite pattern at the landscape scale. In addition, neighborhood coflowering density also impacted forward pollen dispersal kernel parameters, suggesting that low neighborhood densities encourage pollen movement and may promote gene flow and genetic diversity. Our work reveals how coflowering density at different spatial scales influences pollen movement, which in turn informs our broader understanding of the mechanisms underlying patterns of genetic diversity and gene flow within populations of plants.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it