Dinaraea backusensis Klimaszewski and Brunke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
85. Dinaraea backusensis Klimaszewski and Brunke (Illustrations in Brunke et al. 2012, Klimaszewski et al. 2018), Table 1 References. Brunke et al. 2012. Klimaszewski et al. 2013b, 2018. Distribution. Nearctic. Canada: NB, ON. USA: MA, NH (NSR). Collection and Habitat data. In NH captured in rotten spruce/fir logs and forest leaf litter. In Canada found in various hardwood and mixed hardwood-conifer forest types. Adults mostly found under bark of rotting logs (sugar maple, red maple, spruce) or in rotten logs; some in polypore fungi on a large fallen basswood (Tilia americana L.), and in moss and litter at the base of cedar, and in litter in a sugar maple forest; a few were taken by Lindgren funnel traps (Brunke et al. 2012, Klimaszewski et al. 2013b, 2018). Material. USA, New Hampshire, Coos Co.: Norton Pool, 2 mi E East Inlet Dam, 7.IX.1984, D.S. Chandler, sift rotten spruce / fir logs, 1 female. Rockingham Co.: Seabrook backdunes, 25.X.1989, D.S. Chandler, sift forest litter, 2 females. Strafford Co.: Kingman Farm, 3.5 km N Durham, 47m, 10.IX.2009, R.L. Mixon, sift leaf litter, 1 female.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.007 |
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".