Atheta (Microdota) pennsylvanica Bernhauer 1907
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atheta (Microdota) pennsylvanica Bernhauer Distribution Origin Nearctic Distribution Canada: LB, MB, NB, NF, NS, ON, QC. USA: IN, MA, MN, NY, PA, RI, VA, VT New provincial Canada: Manitoba: Birds Hill [Prov. Park] - bur oak [trail], 2016-IX-16, records 50.0083°N, 96.9216°W, 264 m, mushrooms, sifting, B. Godin & D. Horwood (BGC) 2 males, 1 female; same locality data (LFC) 2 males, 2 females; Hecla, 2016-IX-17, 51.7849°N, 96.6152°W, 218 m, mushroom, sifting, B. Godin & D. Horwood (BGC) 1 female. References Bernhauer, 1907, Klimaszewski et al. 2018 Collection and habitat data. Habitat (outside of the study area). This species is found in various conifer, mixed and hardwood/deciduous forests such as red spruce dominated forests, black spruce forests, balsam fir-spruce forests, jack pine forests, red pine forests, old-growth hemlock forests, riparian forests, red oak and maple forests, red oak forests, various mixed forests, northern hardwood forests, rich Appalachian hardwood forest, Populus stands, and yellow birch forests. Adults are often abundant in various kinds of decaying and fresh mushrooms (gilled, polypore; Polyporus varius on side of log, stalked polypores) on forest floor and also occur in forest litter, especially in the spring; often captured in abundance in pitfall traps. Collecting period. IV–X. Collecting method. Sifting forest litter, pitfall traps.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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".