MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197064260 · doi:10.11646/zootaxa.5027.3.3

Toward a biogeographic regionalization of the Nearctic region: Area nomenclature and digital map

2021· article· en· W3197064260 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tania Escalante, Gerardo Rodríguez‐Tapia, Juan J. Morrone

Bibliographic record

VenueZootaxa · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicScarabaeidae Beetle Taxonomy and Biogeography
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNearctic ecozoneDominionArchaeologyGeographyPeninsulaEcologyBiologyTaxonomy (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We provide a preliminary nomenclatural proposal and a digital map of the Nearctic region, based on published regionalizations, especially Dice (1943), and applying the International Code of Area Nomenclature. The Nearctic region is comprised of three subregions (one of them with two dominions), one transition zone and 29 provinces. The Arctic subregion, in northern North America and Greenland, includes the Eskimoan, Hudsonian, Aleutian and Sitkan provinces. The Western subregion, in western North America, includes the Californian dominion, with the Californian and Oregonian provinces; and the Rocky Mountain dominion, including the Montanian, Saskatchewan, Palusian, Artemisian, Coloradan, Kansan, Mohavian, Navahonian, Sonoran, Chihuahuan, Comanche, and Baja California provinces. The Alleghany subregion, in eastern North America, includes the Illinoian, Canadian, Carolinian, Texan, Austroriparian, and Tamaulipan provinces. The Mexican Transition Zone, situated in the area of overlap with the Neotropical region, includes the Sierra Madre Occidental, Sierra Madre Oriental, Transmexican Volcanic Belt, Sierra Madre del Sur and Chiapas Highlands provinces.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0080.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.161 · 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

Citations48
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZootaxaSame topicScarabaeidae Beetle Taxonomy and BiogeographyFrench-language works237,207