Bibliographic record
Abstract
The funnel of Gammarus oceanicus extends as a fold of the foregut wall into the midgut lumen. It comprises an anterior segment, to which both foregut epithelium and cuticle contribute, and a posterior segment that lacks the epithelium. The latter segment consists of two layers of foregut cuticle that are in close contact and extend distally beyond the point where the foregut epithelium turns back on itself; contact between the two cuticular layers develops as the epithelium retracts from between them, in postmolt. Light microscopy does not consistently distinguish between the funnel’s posterior segment and the peritrophic membrane found within mid- and hindguts; however, their ultrastructural organizations are distinctly different, and an origin of peritrophic membrane from the funnel of some amphipods, as suggested in the literature, is not the case for Gammarus oceanicus. Scattered within the posterior segment cuticle are clusters of short, highly curved, electron-lucent rods. Such features have not been described from other crustacean cuticles. However, rather than being novel structures, they are interpreted as artifacts produced by sectioning of the abundant chitin macrofibrils of the cuticle.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".