Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Invertebrate Systematics enjoyed another successful year in 2011, not only by continuing to publish significant contributions but also by implementing several changes that directly benefit authors.In addition to maintaining its broad international readership and authorship, the journal saw a dramatic increase in its impact factor to 2.492reflecting the high quality of its content.Throughout the year, the journal published manuscripts that used a broad array of methodological approaches and described a diverse range of groups, including arachnids (Acari, Araneae and Opiliones), hexapods (Coleoptera, Diptera, Hymenoptera, Plecoptera, Psocodea and Collembola) and crustaceans (Decapoda and Amphipoda).In addition, there were several manuscripts on less well studied groups such as annelids, bryozoans, cnidarians, molluscs, platyhelminths and sponges.The journal also continued its series of Perspective articles, formerly called Viewpoints, which give authors the freedom to present thought-provoking ideas, develop novel hypotheses, and speculate on controversial topics.In 'Protecting the innocent: studying short-range endemic taxa enhances conservation outcomes ', Harvey et al. (2011) examine the systematics of terrestrial and freshwater groups that have very restricted distributions, and their importance in conservation biology and environmental assessment.In several respects, this paper provides new perspectives on an earlier paper by Harvey (2002a), 'Short-range endemism among the Australian fauna: some examples from non-marine environments', which is the journal's most-read article and the feature paper for the Invertebrate Systematics Special Issue on Short-range Endemism in the Australian Biota (Vol.16, No. 4, 2002).In the second Perspective in 2011, 'A collaborative, integrated and electronic future for taxonomy ', Norman Johnson (2011) challenges traditional approaches to taxonomy and proposes that the barriers to greater efficiency and throughput in taxonomic projects are primarily social rather than technological, and that increased collaboration among taxonomic specialists can significantly shorten the timeline and add increased rigor.This paper also proposes that taxonomy should fully embrace electronic media and informatics tools, and that this requires the development and widespread implementation of community data standards.Like all Perspectives in the journal, these two articles are freely available online.Because Invertebrate Systematics relies on authors to submit their best work, we made several changes to facilitate this process.We implemented a new manuscript submission and tracking system, ScholarOne, which is widely used in scholarly publishing; in addition to making the submission process easier for authors, we expect the new system to help us reduce handling times and improve our reporting capabilities.Perhaps more importantly for authors, Invertebrate Systematics has removed all page charges.As always, the journal provides authors with rigorous and rapid peer review, Open Access options and free colour online and in PDFs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,008 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,012 | 0,003 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».