Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ticks are obligate blood-feeding ectoparasites of many hosts, and are second only to mosquitoes as the most common arthropod pathogen vectors. Ticks use many different strategies to detect suitable hosts for a successful blood meal. They can actively search for hosts moving toward distant stimuli, or they wait on vegetation until a host comes within reach (aka. 'questing'). Through the questing process, ticks detect chemical stimuli associated with the host, relying on chemosensation. Olfactory information detected from a potential host will shape tick host-seeking behaviour, enhancing the likelihood of host contact. Other factors and cues linked to host detection include heat, detected through thermo-sensitive sensilla, humidity, detected through hygroreceptors, visual cues, detected through the optical system, and vibrations, detected through mechanoreceptors. The level of bacterial infection in ticks is also an important factor influencing host detection ability and tick behaviour. Here, an overview of the multiple factors shaping host detection in ticks is presented, unifying all the elements, and providing a comprehensive model coordinated by the multimodal tick sensory system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.178 | 0.007 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".