MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6949986219 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.4763170

Allocapnia illinoensis Frison 1935

2011· article· en· W6949986219 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTributaryDisjunctPopulationNatural (archaeology)Type (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Allocapnia illinoensis Frison. Frison (1935) described this species from a disjunct population in Clark County in southeastern Illinois. Otherwise, the bulk of its distribution occurs in the upper Great Lakes region, eastern Canada, and from scattered locations in the Appalachian Mountains (Ross & Ricker 1971, DeWalt et al. 2010). Despite numerous attempts to recollect the species from and near the type locality, no new specimens have been found. Consequently, Webb (2002) and DeWalt et al. (2005) have listed it as extirpated from Illinois. Grubbs (2004) stated that although Finni (1973), Bednarik & McCafferty (1977), and Stewart & Stark (2002) each listed A. illinoensis from Indiana, no specific literature records or museum specimens had been found. We present one population from northeastern Indiana and a second from central Indiana ca. 90 km northeast of the type locality. IN, Putnam Co., Tributary Big Walnut Creek, Hall Woods Nature Preserve, 4 km E Bainbridge, 39.7608, -86.7837, 4/20/2008, R.E. DeWalt, S.K. Ferguson, ♀ (INHS); Steuben Co., Tributary Lake Lonidaw, 10 km NNW Angola, Potawatomi State Park, Potawatomi Nature Preserve, 41.7091, - 85.0150, 3/10/2006, R.E. DeWalt, 6♂, 4♀ (INHS); same location, 3/9/2008, R.E. DeWalt, D.W. Webb, 5♂, 2♀ (INHS).

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.169 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and Behavior→French-language works237,207→