Eumicrota socia NB, NS, ON, PE, QC AR, DC, FL, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, ME, MD, MI, MO, NY, NC, NH (NSR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
148. Eumicrota socia (Erichson) (Illustrations in Brunke et al. 2012, Klimaszewski et al. 2018), Table 1 References. Erichson 1839. Seevers 1951. Klimaszewski et al. 2009c, 2018. Majka and Klimaszewski 2010. Brunke et al. 2012. Distribution. Nearctic. Canada: NB, NS, ON, PE, QC. USA: AR, DC, FL, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MA, ME, MD, MI, MO, NH (NSR), NY, NC, OH, PA, SC, TN, TX, VA, WI, WV. Collection and Habitat data. In NH one male was captured by a window trap in July; in MD found in rotten wood/fungi. In Canada taken in hardwood forests, mixed forests, coniferous forests, and floodplain forests, and a savanna (Klimaszewski et al. 2009). Adults were found on/in a Pleurotus sp. on logs and dead standing trembling aspens, in partially dried Pleurotus sp. on dead standing sugar maple, in decaying polypore fungi on dead standing spruce, in bracket fungi, in/on gilled mushrooms on logs and forest floor, on Climacodon septentrionale (Fr.) P. growing on dead standing sugar maple; also found on Heterobasidium annosum (Fr.) Bref. on red spruce and in forest debris (Klimaszewski et al. 2018). Material. USA, New Hampshire, Strafford Co.: 4 mi W Durham, 15–22.VII.1982, R.M. Reeves, window trap, 1 male. Maryland, Prince Georges Co.: Patuxent Wildlife Refuge, 11.VII.1983, D.S. Chandler, sift rotten wood/ fungi, 1 male, 1 sex?
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.079 | 0.024 |
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".