Bibliographic record
Abstract
[Acanthiza whitlocki North] Acanthiza whitlocki North, 1909: 55 (Lake Way, East Murchison District, Western Australia). Now Acanthiza apicalis whitlocki North, 1909. See Mayr, 1986b: 436, and Schodde and Mason, 1999: 201–203. No type was designated in the original description, but North said that his type series of two males and one female was among a collection of birds made by F.L. Whitlock in the vicinity of Lake Way for H.L. White. Dates of collection were not given, but the name was published in September 1909. There are three of Whitlock’s Lake Way specimens in AMNH from the Mathews Collection, all three of which I found in the Mathews catalog. Apparently, when Mathews began to catalog his collection, about 1909, he twice entered portions of it in more or less systematic order, but without noting from whom the specimens were obtained. About 1910, he began entering specimens as they came to him, usually giving the source of the specimens. All three of these Whitlock specimens were entered in the early parts of the catalog and show no provenance. Two were collected on 17 August 1909 (nos. 4001 and 4002) and would appear to have been collected too late to have been used in the September 1909 description. The third specimen is entered as Mathews number 2198 and bears a Mathews type label, marked ‘‘Cotype’’, with a reference to North’s description. The specimen retains Whitlock’s field label but no H.L. White label. Mathews often received Whitlock specimens directly from the collector or from the WAM, but he also often removed labels from specimens that he obtained from others. Because Mathews labeled this specimen a co-type (5 syntype), it was necessary to trace North’s original type series. Longmore (1991: 15) listed a male and a female syntype in AM, and Longmore (personal commun.) informed me that the third syntype is in MV, HLW 2142, collected by Whitlock in the East Murchison, Western Australia, on 5 July 1909. Therefore, Mathews’ specimen in AMNH has no standing as a type.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.004 |
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".