Bibliographic record
Abstract
Family Linotaeniidae (sensu Minelli) Strigamia acuminata (Leach). This species is native to Europe and was inadvertently introduced to North America (Bonato et al. 2012). Kevan (1983) reported the species from Québec, but this record needs confirmation. Bonato et al. (2012) state that records of this species from North America require confirmation because of “probable confusion with S. chionophila ”. Thus, the record of this species from Québec is considered tentative until the material is re-examined. Strigamia chionophila (Wood). This Nearctic species was thought by several authors (e.g., Chamberlin 1920; Eason 1964) to be synonymous with S. acuminata, although the synonymy was never formalised. Bonato et al. (2012) recently examined both species and concluded that they are distinct. The holotype was collected at Fort Simpson, Northwest Territories, the only jurisdiction reported for this species by Kevan (1983) and Behan-Pelletier (1993); however, Chamberlin (1920) reported the species from Ottawa, Ontario and claimed that this was one of the most abundant North American centipedes, particularly in northern regions, and Crabill (1952) reported it from Alberta and Ontario. Strigamia parviceps Wood. This Nearctic species was reported from British Columbia by Chamberlin (1954, 1963) and Kevan and Scudder (1989). Bonato et al. (2012) pointed out that the true identity of this species remains uncertain.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.048 | 0.013 |
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".