A revision of Chrysopidae (Neuroptera) from the late Eocene Florissant Formation, Colorado, with description of new species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The green lacewings (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae) of the late Eocene Florissant Formation (Colorado, USA) are revised. Thirteen species in six genera of Nothochrysinae are recognized, including four new species: Archaeochrysa cockerelli sp. nov., Cimbrochrysa americana sp. nov., C. major sp. nov., and Lithochrysa meyeri sp. nov. The validity of the genus Dyspetochrysa Adams, 1967 is tenuous; it might be a synonym of Archaeochrysa Adams, 1967. Lithochrysa Carpenter, 1935 and L. ferruginea (Cockerell, 1909) are considered a valid genus and species. A lectotype and paralectotype of Tribochrysa firmata Scudder, 1890 are designated. The genus Cimbrochrysa Schlter, 1982 is recorded from North America for the first time. Eocene chrysopid assemblages are briefly analyzed. The late Eocene Florissant assemblage is less diverse than those of early Eocene North America, and greatly differs from late Eocene European assemblages.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".