Fragosa tenuis Miranda & Skevington & Marshall 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fragosa tenuis species group Description. Head. Face wholly pale; tubercle convex and ventrally positioned (Fig. 81). Frons narrow (less than 1/3 of head width) and pale on ventral 1/4 to 1/2 lateral to lunule (Fig. 82). Frons/frontal triangle smooth. Frontal triangle white microtrichia homogeneously distributed but oriented ventro-dorsally (only visible from a ventral view) (Fig. 81). Female ocellar triangle separated by more than its length from the posterior eye margin (Fig. 82). Dorsal occiput with microtrichia oriented ventro-dorsally (Figs 80, 82). Dorsal occiput with 1–2 rows of pile (Fig. 82). Thorax. Scutum shiny black. Metathoracic epimera extended dorsal to the metacoxa but not so close to each other as in the F. rugosifrons group (Fig. 79). Metafemur with sub-apical dark band (Fig. 80). Wing. Female wing hyaline basally and gradually turning light brown towards apex; female wing bare on basal 1/3 to 2/3 of c, and bases of br and bm. Terminalia. Male epandrium and hypandrium of similar size (Figs 92, 94); surstylus sub-quadrangular with slightly extended apex (Fig. 93, 94); subepandrial sclerite rectangular and wide, with basal corners slightly extended and round (Fig. 95). Included species (6): F. aurora (Hull, 1943c) comb. nov. [1b], F. filissima (Hull, 1943a) comb. nov. [1a], F. macer (Curran, 1930a) comb. nov. [1b], F. tenuis (Walker, 1852) comb. nov. [2, type lost], F. titania (Hull, 1943a) comb. nov. [1b], F. virgilio (Hull, 1942b) comb. nov. [1a]. Comments. Fragosa aurora (Fig. 74) and F. virgilio (Fig. 76) were previously allocated to the O. lepidus group (Mengual et al. 2018). However, the type specimen of F. virgilio and photos of the type and the original description of F. aurora were studied and they show the distinct very narrow and long 2 nd abdominal segment that defines the genus Fragosa, and the pale smooth frontal triangle that defines the F. tenuis group.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.006 |
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".