Standard methods to estimate strength parameters, flight activity, comb construction, and fitness of <i>Apis mellifera</i> colonies 2.0
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
This paper describes methods for estimating honey bee (Apis mellifera) colony strength by which mean population measures of adult bees and brood are obtained. Additionally, secondary measures, such as the quantity of stored honey and pollen, brood pattern, flight activity, comb construction, and the expression of visible disease or parasite symptoms are addressed. There are generally two contexts in which an investigator wishes to measure colony strength: (1) at the beginning of a study as part of manipulations to produce uniform colonies and reduce experimental error, and (2) as a response variable during or at the end of an experiment. Moreover, there are two general modes for measuring colony strength: (1) an objective mode that uses quantitative measures, and (2) a subjective mode that relies on visual estimates by one or more observers. Other parameters that do not directly measure colony strength are described because they give important indicators of colony state. These parameters include flight activity at the hive entrance, comb construction, and two proxy measures of colony fitness: production of queen cells and drone brood.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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