Lasioglossum (Sphecodogastra) oenotherae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lasioglossum (Sphecodogastra) oenotherae (Stevens 1920) (lusorium group) County records: Ingham, Kent, Livingston, Washtenaw. Notes. The nesting biology of Ontario populations have been studied in detail (Knerer & Mackay 1969). Records of this species are largely absent from the Midwest, although the species occurs widely from the Central Plains to Maritime Canada (Gibbs et al. 2013; McGinley 2003). Multiple attempts by JG were made to capture female L. oenotherae in Ingham County from Oenothera spp. (Onagraceae) in the early and late hours of the day without success, but two males were obtained from other flowers during the middle of the day when females would not typically be active (McGinley 2003). Material examined. Ingham Co.: Lake Lansing, Haslett, N 42.749 W84.4, 20 Aug. 2013 (1 ♂ JBWM); Harrison Park, East Lansing, N42.754 W84.486, 25 Aug. 2013 (1 ♂ JBWM); Livingston Co.: E. S. George Reserve, 3 Jul. 19 (5/9)5, Oenothera fruticosa (as tetragona) (UMMZ). Kent Co.: Grand Rapids, 19 Jun. 2014, Oenothera biennis L. (♀ http://bugguide.net/node/view/940949).
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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.
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".