Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spatial and scale effects have barely been considered in forensic entomology, despite their pervasive influence on most of the parameters affecting the development of insect larval stages and the progression of insect succession on cadavers. Here, we used smoothing/interpolation techniques and semivariograms to document the spatial dynamics of sarcosaprophageous Calliphoridae, an important forensic taxon, in the Greater Moncton area in New Brunswick, Canada. Results indicated that the spatial dynamics of Calliphoridae differed between species, some species showing strong patterns of regional aggregation while others did not. Multivariate spatial correlations indicated that interspecific relationships in space varied widely, ranging from local and large-scale aggregation to spatial anticorrelation between species. Overall, this study suggested that even within a restricted timescale, the spatial dynamics of Calliphoridae can operate at many scales, manifest in different patterns, and be attributed to multiple different causes. We stress that forensic entomology has much to benefit from the use of spatial analysis because many important forensic questions, both at the fundamental and practical levels, require a spatial solution.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".