Georthocladius (Georthocladius) fimbriosus Saether et Sublette
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Georthocladius (Georthocladius) fimbriosus Saether et Sublette Figs 20A–D Diagnosis. SI simple serrated; premandible with one apical tooth, no brush; antenna (Fig. 20A) 5-segmented, 3 rd segment shorter than 4 th, no apparent LO, blade distinctly longer than flagellum, AR 1.6; mandible (Fig. 20B) with two large inner teeth, apical tooth shorter than combined width of inner two, seta interna with 7 plumose branches; mentum (Fig. 20C) with single dome-shaped median tooth, 4 laterals, last one may be bifid or notched, lateral margin with sclerotized posterior extension; VP plates distinct originating from outer margin of first lateral tooth and ending at level of seta submenti; posterior end of abdomen as in Fig. 20D; procercus absent, one strong apical seta and 3–4 short weak setae at the base; anal tubules very long tapering about 4–5x as long as posterior parapod (when fully extended). Notes. The larva fits the species description given by Saether & Sublette (1983), but should be considered tentative until the larvae have been associated for the other three species in the subgenus Georthocladius, particularly Georthocladius (Georthocladius) triquetrus Saether et Sublette which is also an eastern species (North Carolina). Ecology and habitat. Reported in bogs, seeps and lotic habitats (Epler 2001). Sampling sites. Parry Sound District. Nearctic distribution. First published record for Canada: Ontario. USA: Tennessee, Florida.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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; 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".