MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6910926997 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.10167133

Philhygra proterminalis

2023· article· en· W6910926997 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarshHabitatVegetation (pathology)WetlandHydrology (agriculture)DeciduousFloodplainFlood myth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

116. Philhygra proterminalis (Bernhauer) (Illustrations in Klimaszewski et al. 2018), Table 1 References. Bernhauer 1907. Majka and Sikes 2009. Brunke et al. 2012. Webster et al. 2016. Klimaszewski et al. 2018. Distribution. Nearctic. Canada: NB, ON. USA: CO, NH (NSR), PA, RI. Collection and Habitat data. In NH captured by a FIT in an old-growth silver maple flood plain forest. Taken in July (at R. Blickle house near Lamprey River) and in October. In Canada found in various wetland habitats in NB: in emergent vegetation on vernal pool margin in seasonally flooded marsh (common), in leaf litter in a red oak forest near flooded marsh (also a seasonally flooded marsh), in moist leaves on vernal pond margin in mixed forest; also captured by Lindgren funnel traps in a hardwood forest and a mixed forest; in ON specimens were also collected near a spring (Webster et al. 2016, Klimaszewski et al. 2018). Material. USA, New Hampshire, Grafton Co.: Bedell Bridge S. P. @ Oliverian Brook, 30.IX–21.X.1992, D.S. Chandler, FITrap, 2 males, 2 sex? Strafford Co.: Lee, 7.VII.1963, 1 male; 20.VII.1963, 1 male, R.L. Blickle.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0650.030

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.205 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicAquatic Ecosystems and Phytoplankton Dynamics→French-language works237,207→