Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scatophaga Fabricius, 1805: x, 203. Type species: Musca fimetaria Linnaeus, 1761 (the 5th of 31 originally included species), by present designation. Junior objective synonym of Psila Meigen, 1803 (type species: Musca fimetaria Linnaeus, 1761), syn. n. (Psilidae). Remarks. Scathophaga Meigen, 1803, originally proposed for dung flies (“ Musca merdaria etc. Fabricius”) of the family Scathophagidae, was cited by Fabricius (1805: 306, misspelled as Scatophaga) under Musca merdaria Fabricius, 1794 (= Musca stercoraria Linnaeus, 1758). Other species of the current genus Scathophaga Meigen (e.g., scybalaria Linnaeus, 1758 and lutaria Fabricius, 1794) were also consistently classified in Musca Linnaeus, 1758 by Fabricius (1805). However, Fabricius (1805: 203–210) proposed a different usage of the name Scatophaga for 31 species of mostly testaceous acalyptrate flies with a short, porrect antennal postpedicel. Most of the included species belong to the families Sciomyzidae, Lauxaniidae and Ulidiidae. Species of Scathophaga Meigen are different in having antennae with a longer, deflexed postpedicel. Only a single species (Musca suilla Fabricius, 1794) among the 31 species originally included in Scatophaga Fabricius belongs to the Scathophagidae. The identity of that nominal species is treated below. The different usage of the name Scatophaga introduced by Fabricius (1805), which embraces a poorly defined assemblage of mostly acalyptrate flies, has consistently been overlooked (or ignored?) by dipterists up to the present. Adding to the confusion, Meigen (1826) adopted Fabricius’s spelling “ Scatophaga ” for his own genus of dung flies without, of course, adopting Fabricius’s usage of the name. This should be categorized as an “incorrect subsequent spelling” of Scathophaga Meigen, even though it may well have been done deliberately. The present fixation of a type species refers Scatophaga Fabricius to the Psilidae. Note that Scatophaga Fabricius, 1805 and Scathophaga Meigen, 1803 are not homonyms according to the Code Article 56.2 (one letter difference).
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.005 |
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".