Systematic studies of <i>Festuca</i> (Poaceae) occurring in China compared with taxa in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Members of the genus Festuca in China were studied from an illustrated database developed using the DELTA (DEscription Language for Taxonomy) software package. The database includes the place of valid publication of scientific names; the location of type specimens when known; whether we have examined the type specimens; synonymy; information on habitat, distribution, subgeneric classification, and taxonomic notes; and approximately 200 images. Five subgenera and 58 species including aggregates are recognized. Six taxa are not assigned to a subgenus at this time. Species descriptions of 400–500 words were generated in Chinese and English and are available on the Internet at http://cdelta.ibcas.ac.cn and as a CD-ROM in English and Chinese from the first author. INTKEY has been used to produce parallel and diagnostic descriptions of 120–130 words for 58 species of the genus Festuca for the Flora of China treatment in English. INTKEY and other DELTA programs were used to assess taxa throughout the database and in a detailed study of 11 flat-leaved taxa that appear to have their centre of diversity in China. The awnless taxa from China that were considered belong to the genus Festuca, not Poa. All the flat-leaved Festuca studied are sufficiently morphologically unique to be treated as species distinct from any found in North America. Clustering and phylogenetic methodologies were used to assess subgeneric and sectional classifications. A new section is proposed, Parviglumae sect. nov.Key words: Festuca, Subulatae, DELTA, China, systematics.
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 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".