Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cybaeus vulpinus Bennett Figs 40–41, 57, 80–83, 86 Bennett in Copley et al. 2009: 387, figs 79–84. World Spider Catalog 2021. Type material examined. U.S.A.: California: Holotype male. Tuolumne County, Fox Gulch, 1.5 miles north of Columbia, 2200’, 6.xii.1986, D. Ubick (CAS). Paratypes: Specimens (including one non-paratype female) and locality data in Copley et al. (2009). Notes. Camp Connell is in Calaveras County, not El Dorado County as recorded in Copley et al. (2009). Other material examined. U.S.A.: California: Amador. 1♀, 3 mi. W of Volcano, 25.iii.1995, D. Ubick (CAS). Diagnosis. Among the males of the consocius group species, C. vulpinus is only likely to be confused with C. pan spec. nov. Distinguishing the males of these two species is discussed under the diagnosis of C. pan spec. nov. Among the females of the consocius group, the female of C. vulpinus is only likely to be confused with the other species which lack U-shaped copulatory ducts: C. ubicki spec. nov., C. penedentatus, C. opulentus spec. nov., C. pan spec. nov., and C. simplex. The females of C. vulpinus and C. pan spec. nov. are very similar; distinguishing them is discussed under the diagnosis of the latter. The females of the other four species are more easily distinguished; separating females of C. ubicki spec. nov., C. opulentus spec. nov., and C. simplex from females of C. vulpinus is discussed under the diagnoses of those species. Females of C. vulpinus and C. penedentatus are easily separated by atrial morphology: broad in C. vulpinus (Fig. 40) versus very small in C. penedentatus (Figs 46–47, 49–50, 52). Description. See Copley et al. (2009). Distribution and natural history. Western slopes of the south central Sierra Nevada region of eastern California in Amador, Calaveras, and Tuolumne Counties (Fig. 86). A very rarely encountered species known only from the holotype male, collected in December, and four individually collected females.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".