Influence of diameter of a sampling device on detectability of wool of the hemlock woolly adelgid (Hemiptera: Adelgidae) in the canopy of eastern hemlock (Pinaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ball sampling is an active technique of sampling the upper canopy of hemlock, Tsuga sp. (Pinaceae), to detect the nonnative hemlock woolly adelgid, Adelges tsugae Annand (Hemiptera: Adelgidae). We tested a 7.5-cm-diameter wooden ball fitted with Velcro® with a BigShot® slingshot that sends the ball into the upper hemlock canopy. The 7.5-cm ball detected wool with fewer sampling attempts per tree and had a higher detection rate after 10 sampling attempts than a 5-cm wooden ball using a much smaller HyperDog® slingshot did. However, sampling with the 7.5-cm ball took 20% longer per tree and fatigued shooters after only 30–40 shots due to the size and effort required to use the larger slingshot. A larger sampling device (= greater Velcro® surface area) significantly improved detection of adelgid wool and is recommended, provided a more efficient launching system is developed.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".