MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6930136828 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.11345195

Pusa hispida Schreber 1775

2005· article· en· W6930136828 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicDiatoms and Algae Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPusaSubspeciesEndangered speciesHolarcticIUCN Red List

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pusa hispida Schreber 1775 Pusa hispida Schreber 1775, Die Saugethiere, Vol. 2, 13: pl. 86 [1775]; see also text 3 (17): 312 [1776]. Type Locality: "Man fängt ihn auf den Küsten von Grönland und Labrader". Vernacular Names: Ringed Seal. Subspecies:: Subspecies Pusa hispida subsp. hispida Schreber 1775 Subspecies Pusa hispida subsp. botnica Gmelin 1788 Subspecies Pusa hispida subsp. ladogensis Nordquiest 1899 Subspecies Pusa hispida subsp. ochotensis Pallas 1811 Subspecies Pusa hispida subsp. saimensis Nordquist 1899 Distribution: Arctic Ocean and coastal regions of Açôres (vagrant), Canada (Nettilling Lake, Baffin Isl), China (vagrant: Jiangsu), Estonia, Finland (Saimaa Lake), Germany (vagrant), Greenland, Japan (Hokkaido, vagrant: Shikoku, Kyushu), Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Portugal (vagrant), Russia (Okhotsk, Bering, and Baltic Seas), Sweden, USA (vagrant: New Jersey, California). Conservation: U.S. ESA – Endangered as Phoca hispida saimensis; IUCN – Endangered as P. h. saimensis, Vulnerable as P. h. botnica and P. h. ladogensis, Lower Risk as P. hispida and as P. h. ochotensis. Discussion: Placed in Pusa Scopoli, 1771, by Scheffer (1958) and Rice (1998). Mohr (1952) described successful mating in captivity between Pusa hispida and Halichoerus grypus.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.006

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicDiatoms and Algae Research→French-language works237,207→