Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carpophilus brachypterus (Say, 1825) Sunbury Co.: near Sunpoke Lake, 45.7658°N, 66.5546°W, red oak forest, on flowers of Viburnum cassinoides, (3, RWC); York Co.: Charters Settlement, 45.8395°N, 66.7391°W, 19.VI.2004, R.P. Webster, mixed forest, on mountain ash flowers, (1, RWC); same locality, 29.VIII.2007, mixed forest, in pile of corncobs and cornhusks, (1, RWC); Canterbury, near Browns Mountain Fen, 45.8964°N, 67.6273°W, 8.IX.2007, mixed forest, on flowers of Aster umbellatus, (1, RWC). Carpophilus brachypterus has been recorded in Canada from Manitoba east to Québec and Nova Scotia (McNamara 1991; Majka and Cline 2006), and in the United States from New Hampshire south to North Carolina and west to Texas, Nebraska, Kansas, Iowa, and South Dakota (Parsons 1943; Chandler 2001). Price and Young (2006) found them on flowers of plum (Prunus americana Marsh.), choke cherry (P. virginiana L.), apple (Pyrus malus L.) (Rosaceae), everlasting (Antennaria neglecta Greene), and white snakeroot (Eupatorium rugosum Houtt.) (Asteraceae), in leaf litter, on rotting fruit, recently cut hardwoods, on driftwood, scotch pine (Pinus sylvestris L.), white pine (Pinus strobus L.) (Pinaceae), and willow (Salix sp., Salicaceae) in a wide variety of forested and open habitats. Dillon and Dillon (1961) list the species from black haw (Viburnum prunifolium L., Caprifoliaceae).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.008 |
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".