Bibliographic record
Abstract
POLYNEMULA Ogloblin, 1967 (Figs 271–276) Polynemula Ogloblin, 1967: 190. Type species: Polynemula rufosignata Ogloblin, 1967, by original designation. Diagnosis. Face without subantennal sulcus ventral to each torulus, with pit medially next to medial margin of each torulus and toruli separated by about 2× their own height from transverse trabecula (Fig. 272); propleura abutting each other anterior to prosternum; propodeum with 2 parallel submedian carinae diverging anteriorly (best seen in lateral view) and joined by a weaker transverse carina near anterior margin of propodeum (Fig. 276); petiole apparently attached to gt 1 (Fig. 275); ovipositor enclosed in gastral sac and strongly extending anteriorly to level of midpoint of mesosoma and also projecting posteriorly distinctly beyond apex of gaster (Fig. 275). Remarks. Polynemula belongs to the Polynema group of genera. It is most similar to Kalopolynema in having subantennal sulci (Triapitsyn & Berezovskiy 2002) and to Platypolynema in having the ovipositor extending anteriorly ventral to the mesosoma. The combination of absent subantennal sulci and anteriorly extending ovipositor distinguishes Polynemula from Kalopolynema and Platypolynema. It also shares with Platyfrons a similar set of submedian carinae joined by a transverse carina. Neotropical hosts. Unknown. Important reference. Triapitsyn & Aquino (2008).
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.016 | 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".