Dermacentor andersoni Stiles 1908
Bibliographic record
Abstract
2. Dermacentor andersoni Stiles, 1908. Nearctic: 1) Canada, 2) USA (Cooley 1938, Yunker et al. 1986, Lindquist et al. 2016). As in the case of the previous species, Dermacentor andersoni has been introduced into various countries outside the Nearctic Region (Guglielmone et al. 2014), but this tick has failed to establish itself elsewhere. Records of Dermacentor andersoni in Brazil (Barroso 1922, under the name Dermacentor venustus), Pakistan (Rafique et al. 2015, Ramzan et al. 2020b, and others) and Nigeria (Ekanem et al. 2012, Yakubu et al. 2015) are treated here as misidentifications. There are also several reports of Dermacentor andersoni from the Nearctic and Neotropical parts of Mexico in Gordillo-Pérez et al. (2009) and Sosa-Gutiérrez et al. (2016), among others, but no bona fide evidence of the presence of this species in Mexico has been provided (Guzmán-Cornejo et al. 2016, Guglielmone et al. 2021). Consequently, Mexico is not included within the range of Dermacentor andersoni.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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".