MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2548878397 · doi:10.11646/zootaxa.4180.1.1

The harvestman genus Taracus Simon 1879, and the new genus Oskoron (Opiliones: Ischyropsalidoidea: Taracidae)

2016· article· en· W2548878397 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
William A. Shear, Joseph Warfel

Bibliographic record

VenueZootaxa · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSubterranean biodiversity and taxonomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpilionesGenusType localityBiologyEcologyZoologyArchaeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ischyropsalidoid genus Taracus Simon 1879 is reviewed and all previously named species are redescribed. Taracus nigripes Goodnight & Goodnight, 1943 is synonymized with T. packardi Simon 1879, and T. malkini Goodnight & Goodnight 1945 with Oskoron spinosus (Banks) 1894; the type locality of T. gertschi Goodnight & Goodnight 1942 is corrected from "eastern Oregon" to Rose Lake, Idaho, based on original labelling. The following new species of Taracus are described: T. carmanah (Vancouver Island), T. marchingtoni (Oregon), T. taylori, T. spesavius (both Nevada), T. timpanogos (Utah), T. audisioae, T. ubicki, and T. fluvipileus (all California). A new genus Oskoron is based upon O. spinosus (Banks) 1894, originally described in Taracus, and also includes two new species, O. brevichelis (Oregon, Washington) and O. crawfordi (Washington). New locality records extend the known distribution of Taracus to the Canadian provinces of Alberta and British Columbia and the US states of Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada and New Mexico. Schönhofer's (2013) proposal of a family Taracidae for Taracus, Hesperonemastoma Gruber 1970 and Crosbycus Roewer 1914 is discussed.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZootaxaSame topicSubterranean biodiversity and taxonomyFrench-language works237,207