Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diallel crosses have been used in genetic research to determine the inheritance of important traits among a set of genotypes and to identify superior parents for hybrid or cultivar development. Conventional diallel analysis is limited to partitioning the total variation of the data into general combining ability (GCA) of each genotype and specific combining ability (SCA) of each cross. In this paper we formulate a biplot approach for graphical diallel analysis. The biplot is constructed by the first two principal components (PCs) derived from subjecting the tester‐centered diallel data to singular value decomposition. It displays the most important entry by tester patterns of the data and allows the following information to be extracted visually: (i) GCA of each genotype; (ii) SCA of each genotype; (iii) groups of parents with similar genetics; and (iv) superior hybrids. In addition, the biplot allows hypotheses to be formulated concerning the genetics of the genotypes. Three published diallel data sets of wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) and maize ( Zea mays L.) were used to demonstrate the biplot approach and detailed procedures were provided for constructing and interpreting a biplot.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it