MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6892451737 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.10166468

Aphis pilicornis Hartig 1841

2023· article· en· W6892451737 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicColeoptera: Cerambycidae studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAlateAphisKey (lock)Genusclone (Java method)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aphis pilicornis Hartig, 1841 Aphis pilicornis Hartig, 1841: 369. HOLOTYPE: (617 [7.02]), Picea. Cinaropsis pilicornis (Hartig, 1841) (change of combination—Börner, 1952: 43). Cinara pilicornis (Hartig, 1841) (change of combination— Hottes, 1953: 158). Valid Specimens. A single pinned alate (617) collected from spruce on June 24, 1833 in Tiergarten, Berlin, Germany. Remarks. Although its generic assignment has yet to be determined, specimen 617 does not belong to the genus Cinara as determined by the curved radial veins on its forewings and the process terminalis being greater in length than the base of antennal segment six. The specimen may instead represent a species of Periphyllus van der Hoeven, 1863 recorded from an accidental host. Given the discrepancy between the specimen’s identity and the name Cinara pilicornis Hartig, 1841, and that the name is well established in the literature, this case will be referred to the ICZN with the recommendation that it use its plenary power to set aside the existing name-bearing type in accordance with Article 75.6 so that the prevailing use of the name may be maintained and that a neotype be designated.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.005

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicColeoptera: Cerambycidae studiesFrench-language works237,207