Hymenaster giboryi Perrier 1894
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hymenaster giboryi Perrier, 1894. AphialD: 124131. New record. (Fig. 3 a-d). Material examined 7 preserved specimens with register number (included station): 124131 -B79 (B11V05); 124131 - B80 (B11V08); 124131 -B81 (B11V10). ......Continued on the next page Diagnostic characters. Arms 5 and thin membrane with muscle fibre and fleshy bands and also spiraculaes (Fig. 3a). With 6 paxillar spines and 5 spines forming a wreath around the anus (Fig. 3b). Two oral spines and 2 suboral ones (Fig. 3c). With 2 rows of tubefeet, 2 adambulacral spines (Fig. 3d). Distribution. Atlantic Ocean, west of Ireland, between Azores and Portugal, north east of Newfoundland, Caribbean Sea, Cuba, Jamaica (Perrier, 1894; Mortensen 1927; Clark & Downey 1992; Mah, 2022; Obis, 2022). Bathymetric range. 1900 m (Mortensen 1927)– 4330 m (MNHN-IE-2019-5917 identified by Sibuet). Present study. 1565 – 1720 m. Remarks. Fifty-two species of Hymenaster Wyville Thomson, 1873 have been described. Five of them are present in the study area: Hymenaster giboryi, Hymenaster. pellucidus Thomson, 1873, Hymenaster rex Perrier, 1885, Hymenaster reticulatus Sibuet, 1976 and Hymenaster tenuispinus Sibuet, 1976. Hymenaster giboryi and H. pellucidus present 2 or 3 adambulacral spines while the rest varies in that number but always present more than two. In addition, they differ in the paxillar spines numbers, H. giboryi has 6 and H. pellucidus range from 2 to 5 (Clark & Downey, 1992).
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.026 | 0.004 |
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".