Bibliographic record
Abstract
4. PLUKENETIA CORNICULATA Sm., Nova Acta Regiae Soc. Sci. Upsal. 6: 4. 1799. Pterococcus glaberrimus Hassk., Flora 25 (2): 41. 1842. Hedraiostylus glaberrimus (Hassk.) Hassk., Tijdschr. Natuurl. Gesch. Physiol. 10: 141. 1843. Hedraiostylus corniculatus (Sm.) Hassk., Cat. Hort. Bot. Bogor. 234. 1844. Sajorium corniculatum (Sm.) D.Dietr., Syn. Pl. 5: 331. 1852. Sajorium corniculatum (Sm.) Baill., Étude Euphorb. 484. 1858, nom. illeg. Pterococcus corniculatus (Sm.) Pax & K.Hoffm. in A.Engler (ed.), Pflanzenr. IV, 147, IX (Heft 68): 22. 1919. TYPE: INDONESIA. Amboina, Bagulae Regione, Illustration t.79, Fig. 2 in Rumphius, Herb. Amboin. 1: 193. 1750. Notes —See Gillespie (2007) for species description. Taxonomic Discussion — Plukenetia corniculata is one of the oldest names in Plukenetia and has a complicated taxonomic history. Originally described as the pre-Linnaean Sajor volubilis (Rumphius 1750), it was included as a synonym of Plukenetia volubilis by Linnaeus (1753). Smith (1799) gave Rumphius’ species its first legitimate name, P. corniculata, but four other genera would be erected for Sajor: Pterococcus (Hasskarl 1842), Hedariostylus (Hasskarl 1843), Sajorium (Endlicher 1843), and Ceratococcus (Meisner 1843). Hasskarl’ s first name, Pterococcus (1842), was previously published by Pallas (1773) in Polygonaceae, so he proposed the replacement name Hedraiostylus in; September 1843 (Stafleu and Cowan 1979). Subsequent replacement names Sajorium and Ceratoccocus, both nomenclaturally superfluous, were published in October and 2–4 November of 1843, respectively (Stafleu and Cowan 1976, 1981). Baillon (1858) first treated Hedraiostylus as a section of the illegitimate genus Sajorium [= Plukenetia], giving Hedraiostylus priority as a sectional name. The fact that Sajorium was illegitimate precludes the rejection of sect. Hedraiostylus in favour of the autonym Sajorium sect. Sajorium (ICN 2017, Art. 22.5; Turland et al. 2018). When Müller created the first sectional classification of Plukenetia he initially erected sect. Sajor (Müller 1865), but quickly updated it to sect. Hedraiostylus (Müller 1866). To complicate matters, Pterococcus Hassk. was conserved over Pterococcus Pall., but as a sectional name, Hedraiostylus retains priority.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 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; 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".