Bibliographic record
Abstract
156 Euura latibasis (Lindqvist, 1949) Figs 152, 387 Pteronidea latibasis Lindqvist, 1949: 77–79. Diagnosis Females are from nearly completely pale to mostly black dorsally, and pale ventrally. Externally and based on the lancet, most similar to E. dorsata and E. fuscarima (E. bipartita group). Lamnium is 1.8–1.9 times as long as radix in E. latibasis (n = 1), but about 2.0–2.4 times as long in E. dorsata (n = 2) and 2.3–2.8 times as long in E. fuscarima (n = 2), but the difference might not hold for E. latibasis and E. dorsata. The middle and apical sutures of the lancet of E. fuscarima might also be more straight than in E. latibasis. Euura seriepunctata and E. serela sp. nov. have also quite a similar lancet, but the serrulae seem to be less protruding and the lamnium is 2.3–2.4 (n = 1) times as long as the radix in E. seriepunctata (the proportions could be similar in E. serela based on one basally damaged lancet). Type material examined Holotype Pteronidea latibasis FINLAND – Varsinais-Suomi • ♀; Pargas (Parainen); 60.305° N, 22.301° E; leg. E. Reuter leg,; MZH, http://id.luomus.fi/GL.3505. Notes Best morphological fit: ZMUO.035649. Host plants Unknown. Genetics COI Based on 3 specimens, maximum within-species distance is 0.15% and the nearest neighbour, diverging by a minimum of 1.67%, is Euura dorsata. Nuclear Based on 2 specimens, maximum within-species distance is 0% (0.02% based on haplotypes of individual females). The nearest neighbour, diverging by a minimum of 0.33%, is Euura lienterica. Distribution and material examined Palaearctic. Specimens studied are from Finland.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.042 | 0.018 |
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".