Fast <scp>Assimilation‐Temperature</scp> Response: a <i>FAsTeR</i> method for measuring the temperature dependence of leaf‐level photosynthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present the Fast Assimilation-Temperature Response (FAsTeR) method, a new method for measuring plant assimilation-temperature (AT) response that reduces measurement time and increases data density compared with conventional methods. The FAsTeR method subjects plant leaves to a linearly increasing temperature ramp while taking rapid, nonequilibrium measurements of gas exchange variables. Two postprocessing steps are employed to correct measured assimilation rates for nonequilibrium effects and sensor calibration drift. Results obtained with the new method are compared with those from two conventional stepwise methods. Our new method accurately reproduces results obtained from conventional methods, reduces measurement time by a factor of c. 3.3 (from c. 90 to 27 min), and increases data density by a factor of c. 55 (from c. 10 to c. 550 observations). Simulation results demonstrate that increased data density substantially improves confidence in parameter estimates and drastically reduces the influence of noise. By improving measurement speed and data density, the FAsTeR method enables users to ask fundamentally new kinds of ecological and physiological questions, expediting data collection in short-field campaigns, and improving the representativeness of data across species in the literature.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".