(2933) Proposal to reject the name <i>Callitriche spuria</i> (<i>Plantaginaceae</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
other than in the protologue (Rafinesque, l.c.1808) and a subsequent mention by Rafinesque (in Med.Repos.ser.3, 2: 408.1811).By contrast, the names C. fassettii and C. stenoptera have unequivocal identities and are species names currently accepted (e.g., Lansdown, l.c.2009: 364-369; Lansdown, l.c.2019).Thus, with the objective of preventing a nomenclatural change that would be evidently disadvantageous to nomenclatural stability, and in accordance with Art.56 of the ICN, the name C. foliosa is here proposed for rejection.It will most likely remain impossible to ascertain the identity of C. foliosa and we consider it more appropriate to have this name rejected than arbitrarily to propose its epitypification by an element identifiable as the earlier C. hermaphroditica.Acceptance of this proposal would allow Callitriche fassettii and C. stenoptera to continue to be used as the correct names for these species, without threat from an arbitrary application or epitypification of C. foliosa.Rejection of this proposal would mean that C. foliosa could eventually replace C. fassettii or C. stenoptera as the correct name for either species.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.019 |
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".