MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6949883192 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.4375870

Aconitum napellus Linnaeus 1753

2007· article· en· W6949883192 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPlant-based Medicinal Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAconitumType (biology)GenusTaxonomy (biology)Type species

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aconitum napellus Linnaeus, Species Plantarum 1: 532. 1753. "Habitat in Helvetia, Bavaria, Gallia." RCN: 3954. Lectotype (Seitz in Feddes Repert. 80: 24, t. 1. 1969): Herb. Clifford: 214, Aconitum 3, sheet A (BM-000628795). Generitype of Aconitum Linnaeus. Current name: Aconitum napellus L. (Ranunculaceae). Note: Aconitum napellus, with the type designated by Seitz (but in the proposal erroneously attributed to Molero & Blanché in Anales Jard. Bot. Madrid 41: 212. 1984), was proposed as conserved type of the genus by Jarvis (in Taxon 41: 555. 1992). However, the proposal was eventually ruled unnecessary by the General Committee (see Barrie, l.c. 55: 795-796. 2006 for a review of the history of this and related proposals). Seitz’s choice of the Clifford sheet as type was rejected by Skalický (in Preslia 54: 117. 1982), on the grounds of geographical conflict with the protologue, and a neotype chosen. Despite being followed by Starmühler (in Wisskirchen & Haeupler, Standardliste Farn-Blütenpfl. Deutschl. : 41. 1998), this is in any case invalid because original elements are in existence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.007

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.

Opus teacher head0.159
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicPlant-based Medicinal ResearchFrench-language works237,207