MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083923282 · doi:10.11646/phytotaxa.104.1.1

New data on <i>Albuca crispa</i> (Hyacinthaceae, Ornithogaloideae), an erect-flowered <i>Albuca</i> from South Africa

2013· article· en· W2083923282 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mario Martínez‐Azorín, Manuel B. Crespo, A. P. Dold

Bibliographic record

VenuePhytotaxa · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorRhodes UniversityMcMaster UniversityFundación Ramón Areces
KeywordsBiologyHerbariumBotanyEudicotsGenusTaxonomy (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within the framework of a taxonomic revision of the genus Albuca we here present new data on Albuca crispa, a species described as having undulate-crispulate leaves and white-green nodding flowers, it being included in A. subgen. Falconera section Trianthera (as series Trianthera). After studying both herbarium specimens and living plants from the type locality and other locations, it is clear that the protologue of A. crispa includes remarkable inaccuracies that make the understanding of that species very difficult, and that therefore are in need of correction. Furthermore, the new data would support the transfer of Albuca crispa to A. subgen. Mitrotepalum, a group characterized by the erect flowers and strongly hooded inner tepals. A complete description is presented for this species, and data on morphology, ecology, and distribution are reported. Affinities and divergences with other close allies are also discussed, and evidence is shown to propose amendment of author citation.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhytotaxaSame topicPlant Diversity and EvolutionFrench-language works237,207