MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4240904994 · doi:10.1002/tax.614025

Plant Systematics World

2012· article· en· W4240904994 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTaxon · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant and Fungal Species Descriptions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSystematicsCitationLibrary scienceInformation retrievalGenealogyComputer scienceGeographyBiologyZoologyHistoryTaxonomy (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadian Botanical Association, the American Fern Society, and the Botanical Society of America.Delegates from 44 countries attended the conference, making it a perfect place for IAPT Council and members to network and participate.The IAPT Council meeting was held on Sunday, 7 July, and highlights are listed below.(Figs.123)On Monday (8 July) IAPT sponsored a colloquium in honor of John McNeill organized by Vicki Funk, Warren Wagner, and Nicholas Turland.Those who attended the Nomenclature Section in Melbourne will remember that we began to organize this event honoring John's career at that time.The speakers were very creative in their talks making nomenclature, both its practice and history, funny as well as informative.A number of issues of importance were discussed such as conservation, the history of changes to the Code, registration, bionomenclature, and new research in John's family of interest, Caryophyllaceae.John was presented with a draft of a booklet that highlights his career and contains photos from some key moments.Everyone had a great time and the talks and discussion were followed by dinner at a nearby restaurant.(Figs. 4, 5) On Tuesday (9 July) IAPT co-sponsored with ASPT a symposium entitled "Where is plant systematics headed in the next ten years?"; it was organized by Tod Stuessy and Vicki Funk.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.669
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTaxonSame topicPlant and Fungal Species DescriptionsFrench-language works237,207