Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neotoma (Teonoma) cinerea (Ord 1815) [Mus] cinereus Ord 1815, in: Guthrie, New Geogr., Hist., Coml. Grammar, Philadelphia, 2nd ed., Vol. 2: 292. Type Locality: USA, Montana, Cascade Co., Great Falls. Vernacular Names: Bushy-tailed Woodrat. Synonyms: Neotoma (Teonoma) acraea (Elliot 1904); Neotoma (Teonoma) apicalis Elliot 1903; Neotoma (Teonoma) arizonae Merriam 1893; Neotoma (Teonoma) cinnamomea J. A. Allen 1895; Neotoma (Teonoma) columbiana Elliot 1899; Neotoma (Teonoma) drummondii (Richardson 1828); Neotoma (Teonoma) fusca True 1894; Neotoma (Teonoma) grangeri J. A. Allen 1894; Neotoma (Teonoma) lucida Goldman 1917; Neotoma (Teonoma) macrodon Kelson 1949; Neotoma (Teonoma) occidentalis Baird 1855; Neotoma (Teonoma) orolestes Merriam 1894; Neotoma (Teonoma) pulla Hooper 1940; Neotoma (Teonoma) rupicola J. A. Allen 1894; Neotoma (Teonoma) saxamans Osgood 1900. Distribution: SE Yukon and westernmost Northwest Territories, south through Alaskan Panhandle, British Columbia and W Alberta, Canada; in W USA, from Washington to W Dakotas as far south as EC California, S Nevada, N Arizona, and NW New Mexico. Conservation: IUCN – Lower Risk (lc). Discussion: Subgenus Teonoma. Type species of Teonoma, conventionally acknowledged as a distinctive subgenus of Neotoma (e.g., Burt and Barkalow, 1942; Goldman, 1910; Hall, 1981; Hooper, 1960). Cladistically basal to all other species of Neotoma surveyed by Planz et al. (1996) and Edwards and Bradley (2002 b); the latter authors discussed the possible generic elevation of Teonoma but demurred pending cladistic examination of N. (Teanopus) phenax. Late Quaternary changes in body size as correlated with temperature fluctuations documented by Smith et al. (1995). See Smith (1997, Mammalian Species, 564).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.006 |
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".