Fungalpedia, an illustrated compendium of the fungi and fungus-like taxa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fungalpedia is an online illustrated compendium of the fungi and fungus-like taxa.In this database we provide notes on the genera and higher taxa of fungi and definitions and descriptions of terms generally used in mycology.Where possible the notes are enhanced with plates and drawings to make the terms easier to understand.In the case of genera, we provide 1) notes on habit, host and lifestyle, 2) higher level classification, 3) genes and other evidence to support the genus, 4) main characters, 5) a critical assessment of the genus and its placement, and 6) photographic plates and/or drawings of the main characters of the genus.For higher taxa we give similar information but a drawing will not be provided.For the various terms we provide definitions and explanations and diagrams to facilitate understanding.We also provide accounts of eminent mycologists both living and deceased.We also provide notes on methodology and biotechnology.Although many of the entries are by invited authors and published in scientific papers, other interested persons are welcome to contribute to entries and/or modify existing entries.Those interested should contact the lead author.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".