MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6911681235 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.13639635

Eugenia florida De Candolle 1828

2015· article· en· W6911681235 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlora (microbiology)MyrtaceaeTaxonomy (biology)Key (lock)Eucalyptus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

6. Eugenia florida De Candolle (1828: 283). Type:— BRAZIL. Amazonas: in Brasilia ad ripam flum. Amazonum, s.d., Martius s.n. (holotype M). Eugenia oligoneura O. Berg (1857: 321). Type:— PERU. Maynas: Muniches, March, Poeppig 2353 (syntype B†; lectotype W!, designated here; isolectotypes F!, G!). Eugenia coloradoensis Standley (1937: 27). Type:— PANAMA. Barro Colorado Island, shores of Gatún Lake S of the laboratory, 28 Aug 1929, W. N. Bangham 445 (holotype F!). [Nom. nov. of Eugenia melanosticta Standley (1930: 126), non Eugenia melanosticta (Miquel, 1855: 432) Koorders & Valenton (1900: 159)] Syn. nov. Note:—Barrie (2009), in Flora Mesoamericana, referred Eugenia coloradoensis as different of E. florida, using characters that we believe are circunscribed under the variation of E. florida (e.g. dimensions of the pedicels, fruits and number of stamens, Mazine in prep.). Therefore, Eugenia coloradoensis should be recognized as a synonym of E. florida. Distribution:—One of the most common species of the section, Eugenia florida is broadly distributed in Neotropical region. Plates of Eugenia florida can be observed in Bünger et al. (2012), Holst et al. (2003), Lorenzi et al. (2006), Lorenzi (1998), Moraes & Lombardi (2006), Pott & Pott (1994) and Romagnolo & Souza (2006).

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.085

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.009

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.143 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicPlant Diversity and EvolutionFrench-language works237,207