MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7006881251

О двух малоизвестных видах жуков-листоедов (COLEOPTERA, CHRYSOMELIDAE) с Южного Урала

2019· article· en· W7006881251 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUSFEU Scientific Library (Ural State Forest Engineering University) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicColeoptera Taxonomy and Distribution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFoothillsSubgenusTundraSubspeciesKarstThe arctic
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

120 years ago G.G. Jacobson described two species of leaf beetles from the southern Urals that until recently remained little-known. Chrysolina roddi, previously known only from the foothills of the southern Urals, the low Zhiguli Mountains and the limestone cliýs on the Don River, is recorded from the alpine tundra of the Iremel Massif. The host plant of Ch. roddi in the alpine belt is the small alpine lovage, Pachypleurum simplex (Ligusticum mutellinoides), family Apiaceae. Two species of the subgenus Crositops (Ch. roddi and Ch. kabaki) are presently to be regarded as foothill to alpine taxa. The distribution of Ch. poretzkyi, described from the low-montane part of Bashkortostan, also shows a foothill to alpine disjunction. High mountain populations of Ch. poretzkyi are described as a new subspecies Ch. (Arctolina) poretzkyi olschwangi Mikhailov subsp.n. Revision of the type which has long been considered as being lost confirms the assignment of Ch. poretzkyi to the subgenus Arctolina, in disagreement with its previous placement in the subgenus Pleurosticha. Within Arctolina, the identity of Ch. tundralis and its diýerences from Ch. poretzkyi are discussed. © 2018 University of Toronto Press.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.128
Teacher spread0.123 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUSFEU Scientific Library (Ural State Forest Engineering University)Same topicColeoptera Taxonomy and DistributionFrench-language works237,207