MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6968189472 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.15755512

Reithrodontomys fulvescens J. A. Allen 1894

2020· article· en· W6968189472 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTeaching and Learning Programming
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalt lakeFaunaLake sturgeonDistribution (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reithrodontomys fulvescens J. A. Allen, 1894 Fulvous Harvest Mouse The distribution of R. fulvescens reported by Caire et al. (1989) included scattered counties in eastern and central Oklahoma. Since Caire et al. (1989), the known distribution of this species in the state also includes western Oklahoma and one county in the Panhandle. These records include: Cotton, Grady, Greer, Kiowa, and Love counties (Stangl et al. 1992); Washita County (Clark and Tumlison 1992); Osage County (Thies et al. 1993); Beckham, Carter, Cherokee, Custer, Hughes, McIntosh, Okmulgee, Pawnee, Rogers, and Seminole counties (Braun and Revelez 2005); Ottawa and Washington counties (McDonald et al. 2006); and Beaver, Dewey, Ellis, Harper, Roger Mills, and Tillman counties (Roehrs et al. 2008). New county records are reported for Blaine, Bryan, Harmon, Jackson, Pushmataha, and Woods counties. Specimen records (39). —Blaine County (2): 9.7 km W Watonga, 1 (UCOCV-MAM 2932); Roman Nose Stat Park, 1 (UCOCV-MAM 5889). Bryan County (7): 1.6 km N Durant, 2 (UCOCV-MAM 5213, 5484); 11.3 km E Durant, 2 (UCOCV-MAM 5331, 5487); 1.6 km S Durant, 1 (UCOCV-MAM 5485); Durant Holiday Inn, 1 (UCOCV-MAM 5488); 3.2 km S, 8 km W Durant, 1 (UCOCV-MAM 5622). Harmon County (16): Oklahoma banks of Red River, 1 (UCOCV-MAM 2334); 8 km S, 3.2 km W Hollis, 3 (UCOCV-MAM 3199–3200, 3416); 9.7 km S, 3.2 km W Hollis, 9 (UCOCV-MAM 3948–3952, 4198–4199, 4201, 4204); 11.3 km S, 3.2 km W Hollis, 2 (UCOCV-MAM 3291, 3565); 11.3 km S Hollis, 1 (UCOCV-MAM 3409). Jackson County (1): plot 3, Altus Air Force Base, Altus, 1 (OMNH 36325). Pushmataha County (8): 6.4 km N, 9.7 km W Honobia, 4 (UCOCV-MAM 5904–5907); 6.4 km N, 9.7 km W Honobia, T2N, R22E, Sec 31, W 1/4, 4 (UCOCV-MAM 6748–6751). Woods County (5): 27.4 km W Alva, 4 (UAM 63044, 63047, 63050, 63060); Merrihew Cave, 1 (FHSM 36736).

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicTeaching and Learning ProgrammingFrench-language works237,207