MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6969452544 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.7872302

Quedius masasatoi Smetana 2007

2023· article· en· W6969452544 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval European History and Architecture
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDorsumSister groupSkullGroup (periodic table)Head (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Masasatoi group Quedius masasatoi Smetana, 2007, from China (Fujian, Yunnan), Laos and Vietnam, was previously included in the Apicicornis group of Smetana (2017a), likely out of convenience as it is rather different in habitus. In a similar way, Smetana (2007) placed Q. masatakai Smetana, 2007, from Laos and Vietnam (Smetana & Brunke 2021), in the Ripicola group even though it was rather different in habitus. Recently, these two species were shown to be sister groups within ‘Clade E’ of the Microsaurus lineage, and together were sister to a species here described as Malaisdius smetanai gen. et sp. nov. (Brunke et al. 2021). Quedius masasatoi and Q. masatakai are here included in a newly delineated group, which also includes Q. piceolineatus Scheerpeltz, 1965 from the Malaise material collected in northern Myanmar. A new genus will need to be described for this group but additional morphological study is required in order to provide a more robust diagnosis. The Masasataoi group is provisionally diagnosed within the Microsaurus lineage by the following combination of characters: head with eyes large, clearly longer than temples but temples well-developed (Fig. 2D), eyes protruding from lateral head margin, posterior frontal puncture situated at about hind margin of eye, without additional punctures between posterior frontal puncture and basal punctures; antennomeres 6–10 flattened as typical for Quediini, not inflated; pronotum slightly explanate, marginal punctures not removed from marginal bead, anterior angles with marginal bead partly hidden in dorsal view, dorsal row with second and third punctures rather close together (about one puncture diameter or less) and separated from the first by a long gap (Fig. 5F), at least on one side; sublateral row not extended posteriad of large lateral puncture, without additional punctures between dorsal and sublateral rows (Fig. 5F); scutellum impunctate but sometimes with micropunctures or scratch-like elements, elytra sparsely but evenly punctate, punctures setose (Fig. 5F); abdominal tergites III or III–IV with median impunctate area (Fig. 2D); mesotarsomeres 2–4 short, triangular.

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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.809
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0950.075

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.170 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicMedieval European History and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207