MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386167423 · doi:10.1080/01650424.2023.2245802

Description of the first- and third-instar larvae of <i>Hydrocanthus levigatus</i> (Brullé, 1837) (Coleoptera: Noteridae)

2023· article· en· W4386167423 on OpenAlexaff
Juan I. Urcola, César J. Benetti, Yves Alarie, Matías R. Urcola, Mariano C. Michat

Bibliographic record

VenueAquatic Insects · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicColeoptera Taxonomy and Distribution
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
FundersSecretaría de Ciencia y Técnica, Universidad de Buenos AiresAgencia Nacional de Promoción Científica y TecnológicaUniversidad de Buenos AiresConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
KeywordsInstarBiologySetaAppendageLarvaZoologyAnatomyBotanyGenus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe the first and third larval instars of Hydrocanthus levigatus (Brullé, Citation1837), including morphometric and chaetotaxic analyses of the cephalic capsule, head appendages, legs, last abdominal segment, and urogomphus. Larvae of this species have many dark dorsal maculae on the body, similar to those of H. socius Sahlberg, Citation1844 and H. debilis Sharp, Citation1882. First instar larvae of H. levigatus can be separated from those of H. socius and H. debilis by the following combination of characters: large size and seta TI5 somewhat longer than tibial length on mesothoracic and metathoracic legs. Conversely, the third instar of H. levigatus differs from those of H. socius and H. debilis in the greater number of secondary setae on the legs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAquatic InsectsSame topicColeoptera Taxonomy and DistributionFrench-language works237,207