Bibliographic record
Abstract
ARESCON Walker, 1846 (Figs 40–44) Arescon Walker, 1846: 50. Type species: Mymar dimidiatus Curtis, 1832, by monotypy. See Huber et al. (2020) for generic synonyms and their type species. Diagnosis. Funicle 5-segmented (Fig. 41); vertex with pale lines surrounding ocelli rectangular and also connected by pale lines extending from each corner of stemmaticum to supraorbital trabeculae (Fig. 40b); mandible with 4 teeth (Fig. 40a); dorsellum diamond-shaped, the anterior and posterior margins not parallel (Fig. 43); fore wing with venation extending at least 0.7× wing length (Fig. 42); marginal vein 2× as long as submarginal vein more than 2× as long as parastigma and with 2 distal macrochaeta, the second one at about midpoint of marginal vein length; postmarginal vein apparently absent (Fig. 42); tarsi 5-segmented. Remarks. Arescon belongs to the Arescon group of genera. These are the only genera with a fore wing venation at least 0.6× wing length (in Chrysoctonus, only males have wings). Arescon is most similar to Tinkerbella, which differs by the hind wing without setae along most of its anterior margin, frenum with a faint longitudinal median sulcus, and tarsi 4-segmented. Neotropical hosts. Hemiptera: Membracidae? Important reference. Ogloblin (1957c) [as Xenomymar Crawford].
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.015 |
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".