MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6931714691 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.7872285

Indoquedius recticollis

2023· article· en· W6931714691 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDorsumHolotypeAbdomenScutellumSeta

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indoquedius recticollis (Scheerpeltz, 1965) Figs 1F, 4C–D, 7C Quedius (Indoquedius) recticollis Scheerpeltz, 1965: 294. Diagnosis Among members of the Bipunctatus group, I. recticollis can be easily recognized by the combination of: impunctate middle areas and posterior half to two-thirds of abdominal tergites III–VI (Fig. 4D); the sparse but regularly spaced elytral punctures (Fig. 4C); and the darkened middle and hind femora (Fig. 1F). Indoquedius recticollis is somewhat similar to I. dispersepunctatus in the sparsely punctate abdomen and darkened middle and hind femora but can easily be distinguished by the darkened first antennomere, much finer and regularly spaced elytral punctures, the longer elytra, the coarser abdominal punctures and the pale apices of the abdominal tergites. These two species may be related as they share a similar shape of female tergite X (Fig. 7A, C). Type material Holotype MYANMAR – Kachin State • ♀; “N.E. Burma, Kambaiti; 2000 m; 4/6.1934; Malaise [printed label] / HOLOTYPUS [red handwritten label] / TYPUS Quedius recticollis, O. Scheerpeltz [dark red-pink label] / Quedius (Indoquedius) recticollis nov. spec., det. Scheerpeltz [printed label] / 6692 E91 [blue printed label] / NHRS-JLKB 000073669 ”; NHRS. Redescription Similar to Indoquedius dispersepunctatus and differing only in the following: antennomere 1 darkened on dorsal surface; abdominal tergites broadly paler apically; head with two parocular punctures; temples slightly smaller; antennomere 3 slightly longer than 2, about 1.4 ×; antennomere 10 distinctly broader at apex, shape more obviously triangular; pronotum slightly transverse, more strongly convergent anteriad; scutellum longer, more typical of the genus, densely punctate with only outer margins impunctate; elytra longer at both suture and at sides, at sides distinctly longer than pronotum at midline; elytral punctures much finer and less strongly impressed, regularly distributed though sparse, separated by more than one puncture diameter; abdominal punctation coarser, tergite III with sparse punctures across disc, middle of tergites impunctate or nearly so on tergites III–VI; female tergite X slightly less strongly narrowed to apex, which is broader overall and more shallowly and broadly emarginate (Fig. 7C). Distribution Known only from the type locality in Myanmar (Kachin). Remarks The type material contains only the female holotype, which was dissected. Based on external morphology, this species does not appear to have any synonyms and can be recognized based on external morphology alone.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.006

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207