MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6893661075 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.3790295

Lasionycta phaea

2009· article· en· W6893661075 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtist diversity and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDorsumApex (geometry)Taxonomy (biology)Adult maleOvoid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lasionycta phaea species-group The male genitalia of the L. phaea species-group resemble those of the L. skraelingia speciesgroup, but the uncus is broadly flattened and spatulate with a squared-off apex and the digitus is longer, extending below the valve. Females have a distinctly different bursa than those of the L. skraelingia species-group. Th e corpus bursae is ovoid, not rounded, with less sclerotized signa. Th e appendix bursae is attached to the dorsal corpus bursae rather than to the left side and extends dorsally and to the left. Its surface is grooved producing a weak spiral of approximately 1.5 turns. Th e male antenna is beadlike (L. phaea) to biserrate (1.5× as wide as shaft in two Asian species (Lafontaine and Kononenko 1988)). Lasionycta phaea is the only North American member of the species-group. Three additional species, L. alpicola Lafontaine & Kononenko, L. buraetica Kononenko, and L. corax Kononenko, are found in central and western Asia (Lafontaine and Kononenko 1988). The species in this species-group were included in the L. skraelingia species-group by Lafontaine and Kononenko (1988). In addition to the structural differences between the species-groups, L. phaea fails to group with L. skraelingia and L. taigata on CO1 distance analysis, instead clustering near L. secedens (Fig 247).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.210 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicProtist diversity and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207