MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Insects of Hawaii, Volume 16, Hawaiian Carabidae (Coleoptera), Part 1: Introduction and Tribe Platynini

2003· article· en· W2156124972 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Terry L. Erwin, James K. Liebherr, Elwood C. Zimmerman

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the Entomological Society of America · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicColeoptera Taxonomy and Distribution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyTribeEcologyVolume (thermodynamics)ZoologyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

J. K. Liebherr and E. C. Zimmerman, University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, 2000, 494 pages, price unknown, ISBN 0-8248-2356-7 Following in the grand tradition of P. J. Darlington, Jr. (The Carabid Beetles of New Guinea in four volumes) and Carl H. Lindroth (The ground beetles of Canada and Alaska in six volumes), Liebherr and Zimmermann have embarked upon a long and arduous task of documenting the carabid beetle fauna of this small chain of islands (16,765 km2) in the middle Pacific, in three planned tomes, the first of which is now available. Although, when landmass is compared with New Guinea or Canada and Alaska, the Hawaiian Islands are but tiny dots in a big ocean. Yet, this first volume covers 129 native species (Genus Blackburnia) and three adventive species in as many genera, fully one-fourth the known number of species in New Guinea and one-tenth that of Canada and Alaska in an area less than 1% of the landmass of either. The evolution of these Blackburnia carabids in the Hawaiian Islands has been truly remarkable, given the authors’ premise that the founding was via a single colonizing taxon more than 5 million years ago.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0870.029

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations4
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the Entomological Society of AmericaSame topicColeoptera Taxonomy and DistributionFrench-language works237,207