Bibliographic record
Abstract
Genus Euura Newman, 1837 The genus is mostly defined based on genetic data. When the Euura epilosa group is excluded, the genus is strongly supported as monophyletic based on phylogenetic analyses of 10 genes (Fig. 2). Unfortunately, no clear morphological characters have been found that define the genus reliably. We provide here a key to separate Euura from the other similar Nematinae genera. Commonly observed high morphological similarity between species of Euura (sometimes even between species belonging to different groups) in combination with large within-species variability (e.g., colouration varying from mostly black to mostly pale) often makes species identification difficult without nuclear DNA. Identifications based on COI can often be even more misleading than those based on morphology, but can still in many cases be useful to identify the groups where this is difficult using morphological characters. In some cases, we do have COI sequence data for the types, but obtaining nuclear data for the old material would be much more challenging. Therefore, we have mostly relied here on sequencing of COI and nuclear DNA from a large number of fresh specimens to cover as much morphological variability as possible, in order to better match them with the available types. This does not guarantee correct identifications of all the types, meaning that some of the types might here be wrongly placed, and in the worst case a change of valid name may be required once nuclear data becomes available (which in any case might not be possible for all types).
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.005 |
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.
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".