Bibliographic record
Abstract
POLYNEMA Haliday, 1833 (Figs 266–270) Polynema Haliday, 1833a: 268; 1833b: 347. Type species: Ichneumon flavipes Walker, 1846, by subsequent designation by Huber & Bouček, 2001: 281. See Huber et al. (2020) for generic synonyms and their type species. Polynema (Polynema) Haliday, 1833. First use of nominate subgenus by Triapitsyn & Fidalgo, 2006: 57 (key). Diagnosis. Face without subantennal sulcus ventral to each torulus, with or without pit medial to torulus (depending on subgenus) and toruli separated by up to 2× their own height from transverse trabecula (Fig. 266a); vertex usually without pits outside ocelli; fore wing without lobe posteriorly (Fig. 268) so wing not or barely narrowing beyond venation, its posterior margin straight or almost so; propodeum with median carina of varying length or without one; petiole attached posteriorly to gt 1. Remarks. Polynema belongs to the Polynema group of genera. Polynema is identified by elimination, i.e., in not having the features of the other genera in the group. The only genera it is easily confused with are Agalmopolynema, Palaeoneura (itself not well defined) and Quasipalaeoneura. All three subgenera of Polynema occur in the region: Polynema (Doriclytus), Polynema (Dorypolynema), and P. (Polynema). Triapitsyn & Fidalgo (2006) keyed and discussed the three subgenera they accepted at the time and indicated that the distinction between Polynema (Dorypolynema) and P. (Polynema) was not as clear as between P. (Doriclytus) and P. (Polynema). Neotropical hosts. Hemiptera: Cicadellidae. Important references. Fidalgo (1989), Triapitsyn & Fidalgo (2006), Triapitsyn & Aquino (2010).
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.011 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".