Phloeopora gilbertae Klimaszewski & Webster 2016
Bibliographic record
Abstract
235. Phloeopora gilbertae Klimaszewski & Webster (Illustrations in Klimaszewski et al. 2018, Brunke et al. 2021), Table 1 References. Webster et al. 2016, Klimaszewski et al. 2018, 2021. Distribution. Nearctic, recorded from A/S (Klimaszewski et al. 2021). Canada: NB, NT, QC. USA: AK, NH (NSR). Collection and Habitat data. One NH male was captured by a flight intercept trap in May at the margin of a freshwater marsh. In Canada (NB) collected primarily by Lindgren funnel traps, with most being in hardwood forests (Webster et al. 2016). One specimen from NT was collected in a Lindgren funnel trap in a mixed Picea – Betula forest; the QC specimens were collected in a Malaise trap in a mixed Picea-Populus forest (Klimaszewski et al. 2021). It may occur in subcortical habitats as do its congeners (Klimaszewski et al. 2021). Material. USA, New Hampshire, Strafford Co.: 1 mi SW Durham, 27.IV-11.V.1987, D.S. Chandler, FIT, 1 male.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.008 |
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".