Three-dimensional evaluation of the responses of two species of flies (Diptera) to an indoor light trap
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We used the Photonic Fence Monitoring Device (PFMD) to evaluate orientation by Musca domestica L. (Diptera: Muscidae), and Calliphora vicina Robineau-Desvoidy (Diptera: Calliphoridae) to the Zevo Flying Insect Trap Model 3. The PFMD's dual cameras record infrared light (IR) reflected from a wavelength-specific fabric; insects do not reflect IR at the same wavelength and are tracked in 3 dimensions as moving objects. The plug-in trap emits ultraviolet and blue light from behind an opaque shield; attracted insects enter the space between the shield and the wall and are trapped on a sticky cartridge facing the wall. An experiment (N = 10) with replicates of approximately 40, 1- to 7-day-old mixed-sex flies of each species was conducted in a 6.1 m3 arena. Prior to turning the trap on, the fly movement was not directed toward the trap on the back wall of the arena, regardless of whether the overhead light was on or off. When the overhead light was off, the mean first catch of both species occurred within 5 min after the trap was turned on, and 33.1% and 41.8% of M. domestica and C. vicina, respectively, were caught. House flies flew toward the trap, many approaching from below, while C. vicina apparently walked or flew outside the field of view of the PFMD until they appeared on the vertical reflective surface, and then walked toward the trap from all directions. Our results show that the Zevo Trap attracts and catches flies, and that the PFMD can be used to track flying and walking flies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".