MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6893753592 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.4759395

Paraleuctra occidentalis

2009· article· en· W6893753592 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHolotypeClearanceEmeraldSingle specimenApex (geometry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Paraleuctra occidentalis (Banks) Leuctra occidentalis Banks, 1907:329. Lectotype ♀ (Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University), Laggan, Alberta, designated by Ricker, 1952 Leuctra bradleyi Needham & Claassen, 1925:225. Holotype ♂, damaged (Cornell University), Emerald Lake, Canadian Rockies Material examined. Canada: Emerald Lake, Canadian Rockies, P. bradleyi holotype, abdomen lost (Cornell University). Alberta, Laggan, 22 July 1901, R. Osburn, lectotype ♀ (Museum of Comparative Zoology). Same location, 23 August 1902, R. Osburn, paralectotype ♀, abdomen lost (Museum of Comparative Zoology). Remarks. The female specimen in the MCZ which Ricker (1952) selected as lectotype was not labeled as such, but he indicates it is the “complete ♀ specimen” and by elimination, the specimen listed above must be the lectotype. The second MCZ specimen (paralectotype), collected at Laggan, “BC” on 23 August 1902 has no abdomen. We clipped the lectotype abdomen, cleared it and found it to be consistent with the figure of P. occidentalis (Fig. 32) provided by Stark & Kyzar (2000). We also accept the Ricker (1954) synonymy of P. bradleyi with P. occidentalis based on the figures provided by Needham & Claassen (1925) on Plate 41 of that publication.

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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.004

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
GenreOther

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 topicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics→French-language works237,207→