Ammodramus caudacutus subsp. subvirgatus Dwight
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ammodramus caudacutus subvirgatus Dwight Ammodramus caudacutus subvirgatus Dwight, 1887: 233 (Hillsborough, Albert Co., New Brunswick). Now Ammodramus caudacutus subvirgatus Dwight, 1887. See Hellmayr, 1938: 504–505, Zink and Avise, 1990, Greenlaw and Rising, 1994, Byers et al., 1995: 256–257, and Dickinson, 2003: 784. SYNTYPES: AMNH 400757 (Dwight no. 1240), juvenile male, 15 July 1886; AMNH 400767 (1500), adult male, 30 September 1886; AMNH 400795 (1239), adult female, 15 July 1886; and AMNH 400801 (1502), adult female, 30 September 1886, all collected at Hillsborough, 45.56N, 64.40W (Times Atlas), New Brunswick, Canada, by Jonathan Dwight, Jr. From the Dwight Collection. COMMENTS: In the original description, Dwight (1887: 236) made it clear that the specimens he described and gave his collection numbers for should be considered his types. The above syntypes are four of the five specimens he listed by number. The fifth syntype, with his number 1261, adult male in breeding plumage, collected on 19 July 1886, at the same locality, did not come to AMNH with the Dwight Collection and I have found no record of where it might be. Because Dwight designated syntypes in the original description, other specimens have no nomenclatural standing (ICZN, 1999: 77, Art. 72.4.6).
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.011 |
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".