Bibliographic record
Abstract
Xestipyge geminatum (LeConte) Figures 2, 5, 19 Carcinops geminatus J.E. LeConte 1859: 314. Type locality: New York; Marseul 1862: 18. Paromalus geminatus: Horn 1873: 306; Blatchley 1910: 616. Xestipyge geminatum: Lewis 1905: 37; Downie and Arnett 1996: 614; Bousquet and Laplante 2006: 220. Diagnosis. Head with disc weakly depressed, with scattered fine punctures in addition to ground punctuation. Pronotum with coarse punctures scattered throughout, though less densely so towards middle; basal marginal puncture row present but subconfused with other coarse punctuation. Elytron with inner subhumeral noticeably weaker than dorsal striae, normally extending to and sometimes fusing with humeral stria, but usually lacking on humerus; outer subhumeral stria obsolete to sometimes represented medially by irregular puncture line, occasionally present near apex as well; dorsal intervals usually noticeably weakly concave, intervals between second dorsal and sutural stria usually with scattered punctures in about apical half (less commonly coarser punctures only extending to apical quarter or so), apical declivity with aciculations variably present, often lacking entirely; sutural stria usually effaced in basal quarter or third, sometimes more or less continuous represented in that area as irregular line of punctures without strial depression. Metasternum lateral to stria with coarse punctures dense (often subcontiguous), mostly separated by less than half their own widths; lateral metasternal stria variable: complete to metatrochanter or variably effaced in posterior quarter or third. In male: tegmen with parameres about as long as basal piece, apical angular prominence obtuse and only slightly expanded just before shortly (nearly) rounded apex leaving parameral outline nearly parallel-sided, width about 1⁄9 length. Female pygidium often with vague and shallow chevron-shaped depression in apical half, but usually lacking incised chevron on disc, incised chevron when rarely present usually incomplete or weakly impressed. Length: 1.9–2.5 mm; total length: 2.1–3.3 mm; widest width: 1.6–2.0 mm. Range. Mazur (2011), and Bousquet and Laplante (2006) list the distribution as USA: New York, eastern N America from Quebec and Ontario to Texas and Florida. I have examined specimens from AR, IN, LA, MA, MO, NE, OH, OK, PA, TX, WI. Habits. Bousquet and Laplante (2006) mention collections from tree hollows, sifting leaves, and in carrion; in addition to those habitats, I have seen specimens with ecological data including cow dung, under bark of logs, Berleses of flood debris and deciduous litter, and others from cross vane panel traps, flight intercept traps and Lindgren funnel traps. Remarks. Xestipyge geminatum shares with X. conjunctum general facies including (usually) effacement of a portion of the elytral sutural stria, as well as similar distribution. However, females of X. conjunctum have a distinctly incised chevron on the pygidial disc that is nearly always lacking in X. geminatum. Male X. geminatum have nearly parallel-sided parameres, lacking the apical expansion present if parameres of other New World species, and both sexes of X. geminatum differ by having the lateral metasternal faces more densely punctate, the elytral dorsal intervals weakly but (usually) noticeably concave and the inner subhumeral stria usually complete from apex to the humeral umbone (vs. usually effaced in the basal half in X. conjunctum).
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.012 | 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".