MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402128041 · doi:10.1080/00218839.2024.2380425

Standard methods for European foulbrood research 2.0

2024· article· en· W4402128041 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Apicultural Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyEuropean unionEuropean commissionBiotechnologyInternational trade

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

European foulbrood (EFB) is a severe bacterial honey bee brood disease caused by the Gram-positive bacterium Melissocccus plutonius. The disease is widely distributed worldwide, and is an increasing problem in some areas. Although the causative agent of EFB was described almost a century ago, many basic aspects of its pathogenesis are still unknown. Earlier studies were hampered by insensitive and unspecific methods such as culture based techniques. Recent advances in molecular technologies have led to a boom in the methods available to study both disease and causative organism, but not all published methods offer data of equal quality, or are likely to result in success. This paper presents selected step-by-step methodologies that have been used with success in at least one laboratory of the authors and considered relevant by the consortium of authors. We hope this paper helps providing some assistance to those wishing to work on M. plutonius and EFB, and speeds up the discovery of new knowledge to improve the control of this damaging and often neglected disease.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.387
GPT teacher head0.572
Teacher spread0.185 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it