Bibliographic record
Abstract
TAXICERINI Lohse 1989 Halobrecta Thomson 1858 Halobrecta Thomson 1858: 35. Type species: Homalota puncticeps Thomson, 1852, by monotypy. Notes: Halobecta includes eight valid species from Europe and scattered other regions, partly adventive in those other regions; one or two species have been reported from New Zealand and are probably adventive here. Halobrecta algophila (Fenyes 1909) Atheta (Halobrectha) algophila Fenyes 1909: 419. Type locality: San Diego, California. Type depository: FMNH LT, 1PLT; CAS 1PLT (des. Gusarov 2004: 9). Note: as valid species, not synonym of flavipes, distribution, Gusarov (2003, 2004). Distribution: USA, Chile, United Kingdom, Corsica; intro Tristan da Cunha Is.(Inaccessible), New Zealand (AK (intro)). Halobrecta flavipes (Thomson 1861) Halobrectha flavipes Thomson 1861: 50 (not Aleochara flavipes Gravenhorst 1806 (JSH in Atheta), not Oxypoda flavipes Hochhuth 1860 (JSH in Atheta); not now congeneric, replaced before 1961 but replacement names not in use (Art. 59.3)). Type locality: Lomma i Skåne [Sweden]. Type depository: MZLU LT♂ (des. Gusarov 2004: 14). Note: as valid name, e.g., Smetana (2004: 407); New Zealand, Kuschel (1990), but New Zealand and south Atlantic records misidentified, teste Gusarov (2004). Distribution: Europe, Algeria, Tunisia; intro? Azores, Canada, USA, Chile, Australia; south Atlantic islands, New Zealand probably in error (AK (in error?)).
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) | 0.017 | 0.006 |
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".