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.
VenueNature Microbiology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Science, Chulalongkorn UniversityMonash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Monash UniversitySchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin UniversityNational Health and Medical Research CouncilAustralian Research CouncilIrving Medical Center, Columbia UniversityHuck Institutes of the Life SciencesCentre for Biotechnology and BioengineeringVetAgro SupLudwig-Maximilians-Universität MünchenJapan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and TechnologyGenome Institute of SingaporeColorado State UniversityUniversiteit StellenboschUniversity of MelbourneMonash UniversityUniversity of SydneyUniversity of California, San DiegoUniversity of New South WalesCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueCooperative Institute for Research in Environmental SciencesUniversity of Colorado BoulderNational Science FoundationUniversity of AberdeenCollege of Veterinary Medicine, North Carolina State UniversityDepartment of Education and TrainingOffice of Polar ProgramsUniversity of WashingtonInstitut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'EnvironnementAgency for Science, Technology and ResearchHuman Frontier Science ProgramNorth Carolina State UniversityUniversidad de AntofagastaNational University of Singapore
KeywordsContaminationBiomass (ecology)MetagenomicsMicrobiomeEnvironmental scienceBiotechnologyEnvironmental chemistryBiologyEcologyBioinformaticsChemistry
Abstract
fetched live from OpenAlexNo abstract in any covered source. Its absence is recorded, not treated as a negative.
No abstract. This is not a gap in this database; OpenAlex has none either. 23.3% of the frame is in this state, and the screen finds HALF as much metaresearch here, so the absence is a measured bias rather than a missing field.
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.
metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score1.000
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
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.
Teacher spread0.384 · 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
