Pseudachorutes subcrassoides Mills 1934
Bibliographic record
Abstract
P. subcrassoides Mills, 1934 – Pseudachorutes subcrassoides Mills, 1934: 24 – Pseudachorutes subcrassus Tullberg, 1871 sensu Hammer 1953: 24 AK Fjellberg 1985; Skidmore 1995 BC Battigelli & Marshall 1993; Rusek & Marshall 1995; Skidmore 1995; Cannings 2010 AB Hammer 1953 as subcrassus; Christiansen & Bellinger 1980, 1998; Skidmore 1995 MB Hammer 1953 as subcrassus; Skidmore 1995 ON Bird & Chatarpaul 1986; Skidmore 1995 QC Chagnon et al. 2001, cf. NF Arulnayagam 1995; Puvanendran et al. 1997 Remarks: Some of these Canadian records are based on Hammer (1953) who listed P. subcrassus from two locations: the Rocky Mountains, AB and Churchill, MB. According to Christiansen & Bellinger (1980), these records may belong to subcrassoides. Babenko & Fjellberg (2006) believed that Alaskan specimens described as subcrassoides by Fjellberg (1985) were very similar, if not identical, to the widespread Siberian species P. sibiricus Rusek, 1991, whereas true P. subcrassoides may have a more southern range. More work is needed to determine the status of these records. General distribution: Nearctic. Unplaceable records of Pseudachorutes sp.: AK Watson et al. 1966 BC Marshall et al. 1990; Battigelli & Marshall 1993; Rusek & Marshall 1995; Cannings & Cannings 1997; Cannings 2010 (four species) AB Powell & Skaley 1975 MB Aitchison 1979; Lindo 2014; Porco et al. 2014 (two species) QC Marshall 1964 as sp. nov.; Pielou & Matthewman 1966; Pielou & Verma 1968; Matthewman & Pielou 1971; Therrien et al. 1999, 1999a (three species); Chagnon et al. 2000 (two species), 2000a, 2001
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
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".