MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6969119130 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.4612013

Munia atricapilla subsp. novana Mathews

2013· article· en· W6969119130 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHydropower, Displacement, Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlumagePossession (linguistics)Type localityMainlandFinchMelanism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Munia atricapilla novana Mathews Munia atricapilla novana Mathews, 1929: 91 (Utingu, Cape York, North Queensland). Now considered an escaped cage bird. See Mayr et al, 1968: 380, fn.; Slater, 1975: 71, 265. HOLOTYPE: AMNH 720588, adult sex?, collected at Utingu, Cape York, Queensland, Australia, on 8 August 1912, by Robin Kemp (no. 1389). From the Mathews Collection via the Rothschild Collection. COMMENTS: Mathews named this form after his collection had become the property of Rothschild; therefore, the type is said to be in the Rothschild Collection. I did not find it in Mathews’ catalog. However, he did receive four specimens of Lonchura castaneothorax collected at Utingu on 8 August 1912 by Kemp, and I see no reason to doubt the locality on Kemp’s label (contra Mayr, Mayr et al., 1968: 380, fn., although the specimen is referrable to L. a. atricapilla). It is, however, probable that it was an escaped cage bird. Its feet are in fine condition and it shows no sign of having been recently in a cage, but the species is known to have been introduced in the Sydney area (Hindwood and McGill, 1958: 107; Slater, 1975: 265) and cage birds might have been purchased in many places and carried widely. According to Jack (1921: 739), Utingu was a coconut plantation on the mainland opposite Possession Island, 10.43S, 142.24E (USBGN, 1957).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1360.090

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.307 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicHydropower, Displacement, Environmental ImpactFrench-language works237,207