Roynortonella gildersleeveae Hammer 1952, n. comb.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Roynortonella gildersleeveae (Hammer, 1952) n. comb. (Figs. 32–37) Gymnodamaeus gildersleeveae Hammer, 1952 Nortonella gildersleeveae (Hammer, 1952) (Paschoal 1982c) Paschoalia gildersleeveae (Hammer, 1952) (Özdikmen 2008) Material examined: CANADA, NORTHWEST TERRITORIES: syntype Yellowknife (62º40’N, 114°20’W) near Great Slave lake, ex small depression among rocks under spruce with moss, liverworts, lichens and old needles and leaves, M. Hammer. ALBERTA: 5 adults, Lamont County (53º39’N, 112°46’W) ex dry litter on SW slope, 20.vi 8i.2008, D.E. Walter; 1 adult, Edmonton River Valley, ex dry litter, 12.v.2009, S. Latonas; 1 adult, ABMI site 330 (57.66861725 N, - 110.962219 W), 2007; 1 adult, ABMI site 618 (56.38592148 N, - 117.012878 W), 2007. Comments. In her description, Hammer (1952) said “Tectopedia I and II have stout points” (p. 29), but this appears to be a misinterpretation of the pedotecta as being linear. In fact, they are ear-shaped with rounded margins (e.g. Figs. 34, 36) as in all Gymnodamaeidae that I have seen except Pleodamaeus. She also missed the interlamellar setae that are covered in dense cerotegument and closely inserted on apophyses on the medial margins of the bothridia.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.007 |
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.
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".