Entomology beyond research and education: 2022 student debates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2022 student debates of the Entomological Society of America (ESA) happened during the Joint Annual Meeting of the Entomological Societies of America, Canada, and British Columbia in Vancouver, BC, and addressed entomological aspects beyond research and education. The Student Debates Subcommittee of the ESA Student Affairs Committee and the participating student team members communicated for 8 months and prepared for the debates. The theme of the ESA meeting in 2022 was "Entomology as inspiration: Insects through art, science, and culture". There were 2 unbiased speakers who introduced the debate topics as well as 4 teams who debated the following 2 topics: (i) Is forensic entomology viable in criminal case investigations and court cases today? and (ii) Are insects being treated ethically in scientific research? The teams prepared for about 8 months, debated their arguments, and shared their thoughts with the audience. The teams were judged by a panel and the winners were recognized at the ESA Student Awards Session during the annual meeting.
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 | 0.053 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.029 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.023 |
| Research integrity | 0.020 | 0.022 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.006 |
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".