Bibliographic record
Abstract
Identification key (modified from Engel (2013) to include the species described above) 1. Mesosoma entirely dark brown to black (Fig. 26) except sometimes pronotal lobe paler (Panama and Colombia)......... 2 Mesosoma with large areas of pale colouration (Figs. 24–25).................................................. 3 2(1) Setae of compound eyes minute to absent (as in Fig. 27)................................ M. truncaticaudus Michener Setae of compound eye distinct, at least 2 ommatidial diameters in length (Fig. 28)............. M. trichommus Michener 3(1) Mesosoma entirely dark yellow-brown to orange or red-brown except sometimes sutures between sclerites and/or extreme margins of, and carinae on, metapostnotum darker (Fig. 24, see also Figs. 14–15, 19–21)............................ 4 Mesosoma more extensively dark brown or black (Fig. 25).................................................... 6 4(3) Almost entire body orange except head black (other than clypeus and appendages) and more apical terga marked with brown (Figs. 1–4 in Mahlmann and Engel, 2023).................................. M. amazonophilus Mahlmann & Engel Body with more extensive dark colouration (Figs. 25, 35–36).................................................. 5 5(4) Metasoma from T2 (except base) to apex dark brown, clearly darker than both T1 and mesosomal dorsum (Figs. 24 & 29); metapostnotum with marginal carina complete (Fig. 31) (French Guiana).......... M. fernandoi Graham & Packer n. sp. Metasoma entirely orange-brown albeit somewhat darker on more apical terga but not clearly darker than mesosomal dorsum (Figs. 21–22 & 30) metapostnotum with marginal carina incomplete posteriorly (Fig. 32) (Guatemala)................................................................................... M. septentrionalis Graham & Packer n. sp. 6(3) Dorsal area of metapostnotum with areolae on either side of midline distinctly enlarged relative to those of neighbouring alveolae (Fig. 33); clypeus at least 3.5X as wide as medial length (Fig. 34)........................................ 7 Dorsal area of metapostnotum with areolae on either side of midline relatively narrower, more similar in size to neighbouring alveolae (Fig. 3 in Engel, 2013); clypeus slightly less than 3X wider than medial length (Fig. 2 in Engel, 2013) (Peru)........................................................................................ M. stenochorus Engel 7(6) Mesoscutellum yellow-orange to orange-red, clearly contrasted to mostly much darker mesoscutum, metapostnotum and propodeum (Fig. 35); clypeus 3.5–4X as wide as medial length (Fig. 34) (Costa Rica to Venezuela).................... 8 Mesoscutellum brown, not contrasting with mesoscutum, metapostnotum and propodeum (as in Fig. 36); clypeus 4.5X as wide as medial length (as in Sakagami and Moure, 1962, Fig. 1) (Brazil)............. M. russeiclypeatus (Sakagami & Moure) 8(7) AOD more than 1.5X IAD (Fig. 37); metasoma with sparser, shorter (<1.5MOD) pubescence (Fig. 39) (Venezuela)............................................................................ M. peckorum n. sp. Graham and Packer AOD and IAD subequal (Fig. 38); metasoma with denser, longer (~2MOD) pubescence (Fig. 40) (Costa Rica and Colombia ................................................................................ M. kathleenae (Eickwort)
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.047 | 0.022 |
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".