MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2291091413 · doi:10.1099/ijsem.0.000778

International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes

2015· article· en· W2291091413 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
George M Garrity

Bibliographic record

VenueINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC AND EVOLUTIONARY MICROBIOLOGY · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Patient Safety InstituteIowa State University
KeywordsNomenclatureBiologyCommissionLibrary scienceCode (set theory)LawClassicsHistoryGenealogyZoologyTaxonomy (biology)Computer sciencePolitical scienceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This volume contains the edition of the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes that was presented in draft form and available for comment at the Plenary Session of the Fourteenth International Congress of Bacteriology and Applied Microbiology (BAM), Montréal, 2014, together with updated lists of conserved and rejected bacterial names and of Opinions issued by the Judicial Commission. As in the past it brings together those changes accepted, published and documented by the ICSP and the Judicial Commission since the last revision was published. Several new appendices have been added to this edition. Appendix 11 addresses the appropriate application of the Candidatus concept, Appendix 12 contains the history of the van Niel Prize, and Appendix 13 contains the summaries of Congresses. The full-text version of this article contains chapters 1-4 of the Code, and their associated references. All other material, including foreword, prefaces, and appendices, can be found in the PDF version.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0120.019
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.048

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations726
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC AND EVOLUTIONARY MICROBIOLOGYSame topicGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesFrench-language works237,207