Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diglyphus begini (Ashmead) Figs 19, 20, 33, 52, 53, 78 Diaulus begini Ashmead, 1904: 356, female holotype in USNM, not seen. Solenotus begini; Hills & Taylor, 1951: 760 –762. Diglyphus begini; Peck, 1963: 103. Diagnosis. Scape dark (Figs 52, 53); legs (Fig. 33): femora dark with apical ¼–⅓ yellowish-white; fore tibia yellowish-white, sometimes with posterior surface infuscate, mid and hind tibiae yellowish-white with a dark ring basally—this ring can occasionally be very weak and is missing in a few specimens; fore wing speculum bare or with a few scattered setae (as in Fig. 72); male gaster completely dark (Fig. 20). Material. Croatia: 1♀ (BMNH). Denmark: 1♀ (BMNH). Norway: 21♀ & ♂ (BMNH). Finland: 1♀ (BMNH). France: 2♀ (BMNH). Germany: 1♀ (BMNH). Hungary: 3♀ (BMNH). Russia: 2♀ (ZISP). Sweden: 389♀ & ♂ (BMNH, MZLU). The specimens from Sweden, identified as D. chabrias in Hansson (1987), were misidentified, instead they are D. begini. Distribution. Croatia *, Czech Republic (Kalina 1989), Denmark *, Finland *, France *, Germany *, Hungary *, Norway (Hågvar et al. 1994), Peoples' Republic of China (Zhu & Huang 2001), Russia *, Slovakia (Kalina 1989), Spain (Canary Islands) (Koponen & Askew 2002), Sweden *, Turkey (Gencer 2009), Yemen (Yefremova 2007). This species was originally described from Canada and it is one of the most abundant species in North America (Gordh & Hendrickson 1979). It is also recorded from South America (Brazil, Colombia, Peru) (Noyes 2016).
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.006 |
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".