MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4247069481 · doi:10.1079/dmpd/20066500006

<i>Cronartium ribicola</i> . [Distribution map].

2006· article· en· W4247069481 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
CABI, EPPO

Bibliographic record

VenueDistribution Maps of Plant Diseases · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany and Plant Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyMainland ChinaArchaeologyForestryPinus <genus>Distribution (mathematics)MainlandChinaBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new distribution map is provided for Cronartium ribicola J.C. Fisch. Fungi: Basidiomycota: Uredinales Hosts: 5-needled pines such as Pinus strobus, Pinus lambertiana, Pinus monticola, Pinus koraiensis, Pinus pumila, Pinus parviflora; also Ribes spp. Information is given on the geographical distribution in EUROPE, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Mainland France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Mainland Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Central Russia Russia, Eastern, , Russian Far East Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, UK, England and Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Ukraine, Yugoslavia (Fed. Rep.), ASIA, China, Gansu, Heilongjiang, Jilin, Liaoning, Shaanxi, Xinjiang, India, Jammu and Kashmir, Iran, Japan, Hokkaido, Honshu, North Korea, Korea Republic, Nepal, Pakistan, Taiwan, NORTH AMERICA, Canada, Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Quebec, Saskatchewan, USA, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDistribution Maps of Plant DiseasesSame topicBotany and Plant Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207