Bibliographic record
Abstract
Iranattus Prószyński, 1992 Figs 2 – 7, 8 – 13, 14 – 19, 20 – 23, 24 – 29, 30 – 33, 34–41 Iranattus Prószyński, 1992: 97 – 98, f. 35 – 40. Monomotapa Wesołowska, 2000: 159, f. 42–46 (synonymized by Prószyński, 2017: 36.). Type species. Iranattus rectangularis Prószyński, 1992. Species included. Iranattus principalis (Wesołowska, 2000); Iranattus rectangularis Prószyński, 1992. Diagnosis. The remarkably long third legs of Iranattus (Figs 15, 18, 30, 32) and scoop-shaped cymbial apophysis (Fig. 4) differentiate it from all other plexippines. The very robust carapace, bulging outward at the PLE and bearing the PLEs on tubercles, is unusual but shared also with Afrobeata Caporiacco, 1941, and Vailimia Kammerer, 2006. Vailimia especially might be confused with Iranattus, as they share erect hairs on the carapace (see Figs 34, 38, 41) and a compact crouch stance, but, besides the cymbial apophysis and long third legs, Iranattus also has a shorter embolus lacking membrane (membrane-accompanied long embolus in Vailimia), a short RTA (long and curved in Vailimia), and two distinct deep conical ECPs (absent in Vailimia). From Afrobeata, Iranattus differs in having longer third legs, a cymbial apophysis (lacking in Afrobeata), a shorter embolus (longer in Afrobeata), a simple short RTA (bifurcated in Afrobeata), shorter copulatory ducts (long in Afrobeata), and deep conical ECPs (shallow in Afrobeata). Some other plexippines have cymbial apophyses (Plexippoides Prószyński, 1984; Epeus Peckham & Peckham, 1886; and Erasinus Simon, 1899), but their apophyses are different in shape — in Iranattus, a long, broad blade with a rounded tip, concave in front so as to form a scoop; in Plexippoides, sharply pointed, for example.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.005 |
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".