MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2968235641 · doi:10.11646/zootaxa.4656.2.5

Revision of the Holarctic genus Gloma Meigen (Diptera: Empidoidea: Brachystomatidae: Trichopezinae)

2019· article· en· W2968235641 on OpenAlexafffund
Bradley J. Sinclair, Jeffrey M. Cumming, Scott E. Brooks, Toyohei Saigusa

Bibliographic record

VenueZootaxa · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFossil Insects in Amber
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaDepartment of National Defence
FundersUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsHolarcticBiologyNomen dubiumZoologyCladisticsBaltic amberGenusPhylogenetic tree

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Holarctic genus Gloma Meigen is revised and includes five species (G. fuscipennis Meigen, G. fuscipes Melander, G. luctuosa Melander, G. pectinipes Melander, G. pyricornis Saigusa Sinclair sp. nov.) and two undescribed species from China, presently known only from females. The monotypic Baltic amber genus Palaeoparamesia Meunier is discussed as possibly congeneric with Gloma. The Baltic amber species Gloma hirta Loew is considered a nomen dubium. A lectotype is designated for Gloma luctuosa. All species are described or diagnosed, and their geographic distributions mapped. A World key to the species of Gloma is provided. Phylogenetic placement of the genus, including a possible new relationship with Oreogeton Schiner is considered, and the relationships and zoogeographic history of the species are discussed based on a morphological cladistic analysis.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZootaxaSame topicFossil Insects in AmberFrench-language works237,207