Bibliographic record
Abstract
2.3. Boroecia maxima (Brady & Norman, 1896) (Figures 7–9) Since Chavtur et al. (2015) have recently published a full and detailed description of this species, we are only providing a set of comparable drawings (of specimens collected in the Norwegian Sea at 65°N 20°W), and meristic data. Table 1 compiles length data for the juvenile instars from three localities, 65°N 20°W (sampled throughout a year), in the vicinity of Svalbard at 77° to 82.5°N, and over the Canadian Deep in the vicinity of 75°N 161°W. It was the dominant halocyprid species at all three localities; these length data are remarkably consistent. However, Chavtur et al. (2015) reported finding a few smaller specimens, which had lengths that are consistent with the sizes we provide for B. hopcrofti below. These length data show there are no significant size differences across quite a broad latitudinal range, nor were any suggestions of there being seasonal variations evident in the data from 65°N 20°W, although the data are insufficient for rigorous statistical evaluation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
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".