Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lemba wushanensis sp.nov. (Figs1–7) Holotype: Ƌ, paratypes 1 ♀ Chongqing, Wushan, 12. X. 1983, collected by Yin Xiang-Chu, Li Bao-Ping and Liu Zhi-Wei. Male Body medium in size. Head short, shorter than pronotum. Vertex evidently sloping forward, frons oblique in profile. Frontal ridge widened in middle and narrow in upper and lower apical part. Eye ellipse, vertical diameter 1.4 times horizontal diameter, 2.3 times subocular furrow. Antennae filiform, 24 segmented. Median keel of pronotum cut by three transverse sulci, hind transverse sulcus placed after middle part, prozona 1.6 times metazona in length. Anterior margin of pronotum with shallow in the middle, hind margin curved. Interspace of mesosternum narrow, length 3.5 times minimum width. Tegmina narrow and long, nearly reaching the hind margin of 2nd abdominal tergite, length 2.7 times width. Hind femur robust, dorsal carina smooth, length 4.0 times its maximun width. Hind tibia shorter than femur, with 9 spines on outer side and 11 spines on inner side, outer apical spine present. Arolium of hind tarsus larger, reaching the apex of claw. Tympanum developed. Cercus extending over the end of epiproct, base wider, apex acute. Epiproct pentagon, with longitudinal groove in the middle, posterior margin straight. The 10 th abdominal tergite in male without furcula on the posterior margin. Subgenital plate not bifurcate at end. Aucorae of epiphallus not inward tilt. Body yellowish brown. Postocular band dark brown, very wide, backward to tegmina. Tegmina with distinct a longitudinal dark brown stripe on the fore part. Hind femur yellowish brown on outer side. Hind tibia pale blue, Hind tarsus yellowish brown. Female Body larger than male. Vertical diameter of eye 1.8 times subocular furrow. Ovipositor valves short, narrower at base, apex acute. Other same as male. Length of body: Ƌ 21.1 mm, ♀ 27.2 mm. Length of tegmen: Ƌ 4.6 mm, ♀ 5.6 mm. Length of hind femur: Ƌ 12.4 mm, ♀ 13.6 mm. The new species is similar to L. sichuanensis Ma et al, 1994. The major differences are listed in Table1.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.140 | 0.049 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".