MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186604175 · doi:10.1079/dfb/20210012870

<i>Calycina herbarum</i> . [Descriptions of Fungi and Bacteria].

2021· article· en· W3186604175 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
D. W. Minter

Bibliographic record

VenueDescriptions of Fungi and Bacteria · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany and Plant Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyEnvironmental protectionChinaBeijingArchaeologySocioeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A description is provided for Calycina herbarum . Some information on its associated organisms and substrata, dispersal and transmission, economic impacts, habitats and conservation status is given, along with details of its geographical distribution (Africa (Morocco, Sao Tome and Principe), North America (Canada (British Columbia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Ontario, Quebec), USA (Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Massachussetts, Michigan, Minneapolis, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Utah, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming)), South America (Argentina, Brazil (Rio Grande do Sul), Chile, Colombia), Asia (Armenia, Azerbaijan, China (Anhui, Beijing, Qinghai), Republic of Georgia, India (Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand), Japan, Kazakhstan (Almaty Oblast, East Kazakhstan), Nepal, Philippines, Russia (Kamchatka Krai, Khabarovsk Krai, Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug, Primorsky Krai, Sakhalin Oblast), South Korea, Turkey), Australasia (Australia (Victoria)), Europe (Andorra, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Russia (Leningrad Oblast, Moscow Oblast, Smolensk Oblast), Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, UK)).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.936
Threshold uncertainty score0.904

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDescriptions of Fungi and BacteriaSame topicBotany and Plant Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207