MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998387172

Hypercompe trinitatis (Lepidoptera, Erebidae, Arctiinae) and its caterpillar in Trinidad, WI

2019· article· en· W2998387172 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Matthew J.W. Cock, Perry Polar, Mike G. Rutherford, Giovanni Cafà, Alan G. Buddie

Bibliographic record

VenueENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Centre for International Agricultural ResearchAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMinistry of Agriculture of the People's Republic of ChinaDepartment for International Development
KeywordsErebidaeTaxonomy (biology)Lepidoptera genitaliaDNA barcodingContext (archaeology)GeographyIdentification (biology)BiologyZoologyGenealogyEcologyArchaeologyHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We document the polyphagous minor pest caterpillar of Hypercompe trinitatis (Rothschild) from Trinidad. This is presented \nin the context of an analysis of the literature and museum specimens to document the history, taxonomy, variability and \ndistribution of this species in Trinidad and Tobago. Notes on identification are provided in comparison with H. cunigunda \n(Stoll), the only other species of the genus known from Trinidad, here newly recorded for the island; images of pinned \nadults are provided for both. CO1 DNA barcodes were obtained for two Trinidad specimens of H. trinitatis. Comparison with \nsequences in the Barcode of Life Database (BOLD) shows that H. trinitatis forms part of a species complex (or perhaps a \ncomplex species) which can be referred to as BIN (Barcode Identification Number) BOLD:AAA1342.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam)Same topicLepidoptera: Biology and TaxonomyFrench-language works237,207