Bibliographic record
Abstract
Portunus sayi (Gibbes, 1850) (Fig. 4C) Diagnosis. Carapace nearly twice wider than long, somewhat tumid, smooth and polished to naked eye, finely granulate under magnification. Frontal region with six teeth; median teeth small but about equally advanced with submedian teeth, lateral frontal teeth 1 rounded and larger than median teeth and submedian teeth. Posterior anterolateral tooth acute, strong, about as long as space occupied by 2 preceding teeth and directed outwards. Chelipeds of moderate length, somewhat larger in males than in females; merus with three to four stout, curved spines in front, none spine behind; carpus with two spines, a strong one at inner angle of carpus and a smaller spine near distal end of outer margin; a noticeable ridge above lateral margin. Swimming legs unarmed (modified from Rathbun, 1930 and Williams, 1984). Measurements. Male, cl 31, cw 61; ovigerous female, cl 31, cw 64 (Williams, 1984). Male, cl 29, cw 55.6, width at anterior base of lateral spine 47.7; female, cl 37.1, cw 76.1, width at anterior base of lateral spine 62.7 (Rathbun, 1930). Color. Chocolate brown or purplish with cloudings of olive green or light brown and irregular white or flesh-colored spots; orange margins on spines of chelipeds (Williams, 1984). Geographic distribution. Western Atlantic: Canada (Nova Scotia, 43°N) to USA (North Carolina, South Carolina), Gulf of Mexico (USA, Florida to Mexico, Cancun), Guyana, Bermuda, Brazil (Paraíba) (Melo and Veloso, 2005). Habitat. Normally this is a pelagic form living among floating Sargassum, but it is occasionally carried into coastal areas by currents (Williams, 1984). Type locality. South Carolina, USA.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.022 | 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".