Peer Review #2 of "Avoidance of copper by fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas) requires an intact olfactory system (v0.1)"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fish can detect and respond to a wide variety of cations in their environment, including copper.Most often fish will avoid copper during behavioural trials; however, fish may also show no response or an attraction response, depending on the concentration(s) used.While it may seem intuitive that the response to copper requires olfaction, there is little direct evidence to support this, and what evidence there is remains incomplete.In order to test if olfaction is required for avoidance of copper by fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas) copper-induced movement was compared between fish with an intact olfactory system and fish with induced anosmia.Fish in a control group or a mock-anosmic group avoided copper (approximately 10 µg/L or 62.7 nM copper sulphate) while anosmic fish did not.The evidence demonstrates that an intact olfactory system is required for copper sensing in fish.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.052 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.265 | 0.179 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".