Bibliographic record
Abstract
Common Amphibians and Reptiles of Botswana ‐ more than just creepy‐crawlies. By Bernhard and Renata Clauss. 2002. Gamsberg Macmillan, Windhoek. Soft cover, vi + 114 pages, 308 colour photos. 39 Pula ISBN 99916–0‐396–4. Snakes of the United States and Canada: Natural History and Care in Captivity. By John V. Rossi and Roxanne Rossi 2003. xxxvi + 520 pages, 270 colour plates. Distribution maps for 121 taxa. Krieger Publishing Company. Malabar, Florida. US$145 (hardcover) ISBN 1 57524 031 9. Snakes of Zambia: An Atlas and Field Guide. By Donald G. Broadley, Craig T. Doria and Jürgen Wigge. 2003. Chimaira Buchhandelsgesellschaft mbH. Frankfurt. Hardback, 280 pp, 174 colour plates. 39.80 €. ISBN 3–930612–42–9. (available from Chimaira Publications, frogbook@aol.com, www.chimaria.de or www.zoobooksales.com). True Vipers: Natural History and Toxinology of Old World Vipers. By David Mallow, David Ludwig and Göran Nilson. 2003. xiv + 359 pages (colour pages not numbered), 71 colour plates. Krieger, Florida, $79.50 (hardcover), ISBN 0–89464–877–2.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.464 | 0.355 |
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".