MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406241882 · doi:10.59520/hg.bapp/pgnm0967

Tales from the Elder: Adulteration Issues of Elder Berry

2021· article· en· W4406241882 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stefan Gafner, Travis Borchardt, Melanie Bush, Sidney Sudberg, Nicolas Feuillère, Mathieu Tenon, Justine Jolibois, Patrice Bellenger, Hong You, Rebecca G. Adams, Jeremy Stewart, Ido Dagan, Timothy G. Murray, Marı́a Monagas

Bibliographic record

VenueHerbalGram · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotanical Studies and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBerryTraditional medicineGerontologyPsychologyMedicineBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The European elder* (Sambucus nigra L., syn. S. nigra subsp. nigra L., Viburnaceae) is a shallow-rooted tree that can grow up to 10 m (32.8 feet) tall and yields small, round fruit (6-8 mm in diameter) that are dark purple to violet when ripe. The species is distributed throughout most of Europe, from southern Scandinavia to northern Spain, Italy, and Turkey, and east to the Caucasus Mountains.1 It has been introduced to North and South America and Oceania. The native range of a closely related and morphologically similar species, American elder (Sambucus canadensis L., syn. S. nigra subsp. canadensis (L.) R. Bolli), extends from Nova Scotia and Quebec south through Florida, the West Indies, and Central America, and west from Manitoba to montane Mexico.2,3 Other medicinally used elder species include the southern elder (S. australis Cham. & Schltdl.), blue elder (S. cerulea Raf.), dwarf elder (S. ebulus L.), Chinese elder (S. javanica subsp. chinensis (Lindl.) Fukuoka, syn. S. chinensis Lindl.), and Williams elder (S. williamsii Hance).4

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHerbalGramSame topicBotanical Studies and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207