Bibliographic record
Abstract
DICOPUS Enock, 1909 (Figs 114–118) Dicopus Enock, 1909: 455. Type species: Dicopus minutissimus Enock, 1909, by monotypy. See Huber et al. (2020) for generic synonyms and their type species. Diagnosis. Face with toruli about their own height from transverse trabecula (Fig. 114a); vertex separated from occiput by a medially divided vertexal trabecula (Fig. 114b); mandibles when closed pointing ventrally, not overlapping medially (Fig. 114a), each with one short and one long tooth; funicle 7-segmented with fu 2 about equal to fu 1 or fu 3 (Fig. 115); fore wing extremely narrow, the posterior margin concave, with narrowest point about one venation length distal to venation, then distinctly widening to apex (Fig. 116); hind wing narrow for about 4 venation lengths beyond hamuli then becoming uniformly wider to apex (Fig. 116); metasoma with genitalia short, in about apical third. Remarks. Dicopus belongs to the Alaptus group of genera. It is most similar to Dicopomorpha in having the funicle clearly 7-segmented, but the fore wing of Dicopus is narrower and the head shape and mandibles have one short and one long tooth and do not cross medially. Male flagellum 10-segmented. Neotropical hosts. Psocodea. Important reference. Huber et al. (2020).
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) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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.
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".