MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148749018 · doi:10.7882/az.2005.024

A significant range extension for the Chestnut Dunnart <i>Sminthopsis archeri</i> (Marsupialia: Dasyuridae) in north Queensland

2005· article· en· W2148749018 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alex S. Kutt, Steve Van Dyck, Susan J. Christie

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Zoologist · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEvolution and Paleontology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyRange (aeronautics)Zoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Chestnut Dunnart Sminthopsis archeri is a rarely encountered dasyurid. Only a handful of records is known from the tropical savannas of northern Cape York Peninsula and southern Papua New Guinea (Van Dyck 1986; Flannery 1995). Within Australia the species was previously considered endemic to Cape York Peninsula (Winter and Lethbridge 1995). Despite almost two decades of search effort throughout Cape York Peninsula very few recent records have surfaced (Winter and Atherton 1985; Woolley 1993; see review of unpublished in Winter and Lethbridge 1995). The last documented capture of S. archeri was in 1993 in the Iron Range area (Leung et al. 1994). Sminthopsis archeri has been previously captured in tall Eucalyptus tetrodonta, Corymbia nesophila, Erythrophleum chlorostachys woodlands on red earth soils, though it is also known from tall heathlands (Leung et al. 1994; Flannery 1995; Van Dyck 1995; Winter and Lethbridge 1995). Data regarding biology, distribution and status are correspondingly scant and restricted to locality descriptions, breeding and morphometric features of captured animals (Van Dyck 1995). Sminthopsis archeri is classified as rare in Queensland (Queensland Government 1997) and data deficient in Commonwealth assessments (Maxwell et al. 1996). This note reports an exceptional new locality for the species, representing a significant range extension.

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 imitation

Not 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.467
Threshold uncertainty score0.660

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.059
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian ZoologistSame topicEvolution and Paleontology StudiesFrench-language works237,207