Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rhinolophus pearsonii Horsfield, 1851 Pearson’s horseshoe bat Rhinolophus pearsonii Horsfield, 1851: 33; Darjeeling, West Bengal, NE India. Distribution N India, Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar; Tibet, Szechwan, Anhwei and Fukien (China) to Vietnam, Lao PDR; Thailand; Peninsular Malaysia. Distribution in Lao PDR (Fig. 31): Bolikhamxai Province: Dan Phorkeng (Dan Phokeng), Phou Khaokhoay NBCA (IEX/SMF collection); limestone near Lak Sao (Ban Lak-20); Mungkon Cave (Tham Moungkon) (ROM/SMF collection); Champasak Province: Near Ban Nong Ke (Ban Nongkhe), Dong Hua Sao NBCA (IEX/ROM/SMF collections); Nong Luang (Nong Louang) (HNHM collection); Houaphan Province: Ban Chak, Nam Et NBCA; Dam on Nam Et, Nam Et NBCA (EBD collection); Nam Ngom (Houay Ngom), Nam Et NBCA (EBD/ROM collection); Ban Buaphath, Nam Et NBCA; Viengxai (ROM collection); Nam Chong, Nam Et NBCA; Tham Nathen (CMF field record); Khammouan Province: Tam Dan Jar (Tham Dancha); Tam Houay Si (Tham Houaysy) (Robinson and Webber 2000); Ban Xam-Kang, Hin Namno NBCA (HNHM/ROM collections); Ban Gnavang (Ban Gnavay), Xe Bangfai, Hin Namno NBCA; Ban Louang; Ban Vang Manua (Ban Vangma-Nua), Hin Namno NBCA (ROM collection); Ban Khankeo, Khammouan Limestone NBCA; Nakai Plateau; Nam Pakkatan, Nakai Plateau (SMF collection); Ban Nathan; Xe Bangfai Cave (Tham Xebangfai), Hin Namno NBCA (CMF field record); Louangnamtha Province: Ban Phoulan (ROM collection); Louangphabang Province: Ban Sakok, Nam Et NBCA (CMF field record); Vientiane Province: Hoi Cave (Tham Hoi) (FES collection); Danyai (Dan Gnai), Phou Khaokhoay NBCA (IEX/SMF collection); Ban Nathao (ROM collection); Ban Nampe (CMF field record); Xiangkhouang Province: Tranninh (Bourret, 1942). Taxonomic note DNA barcodes indicate considerably genetic variation within bats currently referred to R. pearsoni from Lao PDR (Francis et al., 2010), but a comprehensive taxonomic study has not yet been undertaken to evaluate the significance of this variation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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".