Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lacuna crassior (Montagu, 1803) (Fig. 7C 1-C 3) Turbo crassior Montagu, 1803: 309, pl. 20, fig. 1. Lacuna crassior – Harmer 1921: 667, pl. 53, figs 27-29. — Fretter & Graham 1980: 247, fig. 198. — Moerdijk & Janse 2015: 22, fig. 9. MATERIAL AND DIMENSIONS. — Maximum height 10.2 mm (incomplete), width 6.3 mm. — RGM.1365195 (1), leg. WG; RGM.1364912 (2), leg. WG; RGM.1365173 (1), leg. ACJ; RGM.1365096 (17), leg. AWJ. SPECIES CHARACTERISATION. — Smooth, medium-sized shell. Protoconch damaged or lacking in almost all specimens, but in a few specimens the first whorl is flat and not clearly separated from the teleoconch. Teleoconch of four round whorls. Aperture typically circa 40% of shell height. Umbilicus reduced to narrow slit. DISTRIBUTION. — Lower Pleistocene: NSB, England (Harmer 1921); Atlantic, Selsoif, NW France (this paper). — Holocene: England (Harmer 1921), West Greenland (Símonarson 1981). Beached occurrences of this species likely of a Late Pleistocene age are known from The Netherlands (Moerdijk & Janse 2015). Today this species occurs from Greenland, Arctic Canada to the British Isles and Normandy (Fretter & Graham 1980; Backeljau et al. 1984). The species has been reported living on or near the fleshy bryozoan Alcyonidium from between the low water tide line to 90 m water depth in areas with stones, rocks and shells dispersed in soft substratum (Graham 1988).
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 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; 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".