Plagiothecium laetum var. laetum Schimp., Bryologia Europea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plagiothecium laetum var. laetum Schimp., Bryologia Europea 5: 184, 495, Tab. II. 1851. ≡ Leskea laeta (Schimp.) Berggr., Acta Universitatis Lundensis, 2 Afd., 3 (7): 8. 1866 = Plagiothecium denticulatum var. laetum (Schimp.) Lindb., Animadversiones de Hypno elegante 31. 1867 ≡ Plagiothecium denticulatum subsp. laetum (Schimp.) Kindb., Bihang till Kongliga Svenska Vetenskaps-Akademiens Handlingar 7 (9): 46. 1883 ≡ Hypnum denticulatum var. laetum (Schimp.) Lindb. in Lesquereux & James, Manual of the Mosses of North America 367. 1884. Type: [Switzerland,] in Rhaetic Alpe Albula, ubi in regione sylvatica versus Ponte in logno putrido, et supra hanc reionem prope Weissenstein, in rupium fissuris Dicrano gracilescenti intermixtum, W. P. Schimper aestate 1845 detexit. Nusquam alias adhuc observatum est. Syntype: PC 0132699!, PC 0132701! Description. Plants small, light green, glossy; leaves forming 20–70 ° angle with stem, complanate, more or less concave, asymmetrical, ovate-lanceolate, with one side almost flat, 1.0–2.0 × 1.1–1.3 mm (Fig. 11 A); the apex acute, denticulate near the apex or not; laminal cells linear, 80–150 × 6–8 μm at midleaf (Fig. 11 D), cell areolation dense; decurrencies of 1–3 rows of rectangular cells; setae 1.3–1.8 cm, capsule straight. Distribution. Asia (Azerbaijan, China, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Georgia, Islamic Republic of Iran, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan, Mongolia, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Taiwan, Turkey); Europe (Albania, Andorra, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Kosovo, Latvia, Lichtenstein, Lithuania, Luxemburg, Montenegro, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, United Kingdom); North America (Canada, U. S. A.).
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.004 |
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".