Corynoptera armigera Vilkamaa & Hippa, 2006, sp. n.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Corynoptera armigera sp. n. Material examined. Holotype male: CANADA, Yukon, Dempster Hwy, km 135–195, sprucewillow forest, noon car netting, 19.vi.1984, S. & S. Peck (CNC). Description (male). Head: Eye bridge 2 or 3 facets wide. Setae of prefrons and clypeus not countable in specimen studied. Length/width of antennal flagellomere 4 1.80 (Fig. 5 E). Palpomere 1 of maxillary palp with 1 seta. Thorax: In poor condition, setae not countable. Wing: Length 1.3 mm, width/length 0.40, c/ w 0.65, R1/R not measurable in specimen. Legs (Fig. 6 A): Length of front basitarsomere/length of front tibia 0.50. Abdomen: Sternite 8 nonsetose. Hypopygium (Fig. 3 A, B): Sternite 10 with 1 seta on each half. Female. Unknown. Discussion. Corynoptera armigera can be distinguished from all other species of the group by having the gonostylus clubshaped, in ventral view broadest far distal to the middle and only slightly narrowed toward the apex (Fig. 3 B), and the specialized setae on the front tibial apex not arranged in a comb (Fig. 6 A). Corynoptera armigera resembles C. fera and C. robustior in having the gonostylar megasetae very strong and not distinctly divided into two groups. It also can be distinguished from C. fera and C. robustior by having the tegmen subquadrangular, not much broader than long (Fig. 3 A).
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".