MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6911888399 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.15026228

Lophocampa argentata subsp. argentata French 1890

2014· article· en· W6911888399 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine Invertebrate Physiology and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrustaceanFeeding behaviorPredationEctothermType (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lophocampa argentata argentata (Packard, 1864) Halesidota argentata Packard, 1864: 129. TYPE LOCALITY. — [USA], Cal[ifornia]; [Canada], [British Colombia], Gulf of Georgia. TYPE SPECIMENS. — Undisclosed number of syntypes (MCZ; one syntype no. 1604). REMARK Reported from Mexico by Turrent Díaz (1996: 78) and Ferguson et al. (2000). Lophocampa sobrina (Stretch, 1872), described from California, is reported from Mexico by Beutelspacher (1995: 401). It’s probably a misidentification of L. argentata argentata.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.186 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicMarine Invertebrate Physiology and EcologyFrench-language works237,207