Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dasystenella acanthina (Wright & Studer, 1889) Material examined: BBB 2016: St. 26; St. 38. PD BB 2017: St. 16; St. 21; St. 43. GARCÍA 2015: St. 17bis (MACN-In: 43514, 43515, 43516, 43517). Distribution: off Río de la Plata (Argentina) (37°17’S, 52°20’W, 183 m) (Wright & Studer 1889); off Malvinas Islands (50°32’S, 63°03’W 150 m) (Pérez & Zamponi 2004); South Shetland Islands to Scotia Ridge between South Orkney Islands and South Sandwich Islands; abyssal plain west off Tierra del Fuego (150–5087 m) (Cairns 2006; Taylor et al. 2013); Terra Nova Bay, Antarctica (300 m) (Gavagnin et al. 2003); Burdwood bank (135 m) (present study). Remarks: This species was previously cited under several synonyms at this area: Stenella acanthina Wright & Studer, 1889; Stenella (Dasystenella) acanthina Versluys 1906; Thouarella longispinosa Kükenthal, 1912; Thouarella (Euthouarella) longispinosa Kükenthal 1915; Thouarella acanthina: Kukenthal, 1915. Cairns (2006) pointed that more southerly specimens differ slightly in having somewhat smaller polyps and marginal spines that are longer (up to 2.4 mm), especially in relation to their basal width (H:W up to 3.5) and that are slightly curved inward toward the operculum. Given this wide variation and the limited differences between specimens of T. longispinosa and the description of D. acanthina, Taylor et al. (2013) proposed that T. longispinosa be synonymised with D. acanthina, noting that a revision of Dasystenella is required.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".