Bibliographic record
Abstract
Family * Carsidaridae Crawford, 1911, sensu novo Comments In both mtg trees the monophyly of Carsidaridae and Pachypsylla is strongly or very strongly supported. Carsidaridae + Pachypsylla (Pachypsyllinae) and Homotomidae form a poorly supported sister group in the AN tree and both families are included in an unresolved basal assemblage in the CC tree. In the molecular analyses by Cho et al. (2019), Celtisaspis (Pachypsyllinae) is recovered as weakly supported sister-group of Homotomidae, rather than Carsidaridae, and the monophyly of Carsidaridae, Celtisaspis and Homotomidae is well supported. Hollis & Broomfield (1989) listed two putative morphological synapomorphies to link Carsidaridae and Homotomidae: 1) the presence of a pair of large tubercles on the metapostnotum, and 2) all three ventral sense organs of the metafemur in a basal position. These characters are present also in Pachypsyllinae, though the tubercles on the metapostnotum are relatively small in Celtisaspis. Cho et al. (2019) mention the bipartite male proctiger as a putative synapomorphy of Homotomidae + Pachypsyllinae. As in Aphalaridae, the three taxa discussed here form, depending on the type of analysis, an unresolved basal (paraphyletic) assemblage or a monophylum with contradicting relationships between the constituent groups. For reasons of consistency, we include the three groups in the single family Carsidaridae. The concept of Carsidaridae by Burckhardt & Ouvrard (2012) is broadened here to include also Homotomidae and Pachypsyllinae which is transferred from Aphalaridae.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.010 |
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".