Dichochrysa perfecta (Banks) 1895
Bibliographic record
Abstract
DICHOCHRYSA PERFECTA (Banks, 1895) Chrysopa perfecta Banks, 1895b: 516–517. Type: female; MEXICO: Baja California (El Taste); monotypy; MCZ No. 11914 (Adams and Garland 1983). Dichochrysa perfectus [sic] (Banks, 1895b): Aspöck et al. 2001: Taxonomic Serial No. 666308. Dichochrysa perfecta (Banks, 1895b). EMENDATION. SYNONYMY PERTAINING TO CANADA Mallada perfectus: Garland 1982 [1984]: 258–260, 409, Figs. 74, 118–122, Map 22; Adams and Garland 1983: 240–241, 243–245; Garland 1984: 94; 1985a: 737–751; Scudder 1994: 45. CANADA: T = 18 (10♂, 7♀, 1?). FIRST RECORD: BC: 1♀, W[est] Summerland, 26.vii.1963 (G.J. Spencer) [SEM]. FLIGHT PERIOD: July 19 (1989; Oliver BC)–September 3 (1976; Penticton BC). BC: T = 18 (10♂, 7♀, 1?). FIRST RECORD: 1♀, W[est] Summerland, 26.vii.1963 (G.J. Spencer) [SEM]. NEW RECORDS: 1♀, Oliver, U.B.C. Geology Camp, at light, 19.vii.1989 (S. Cannings) [SEM]. FLIGHT PERIOD: July 19 (1989; Oliver)–September 3 (1976; Penticton). LOCALITIES: Oliver [49°11'N 119°33'W; SEM]. Penticton [49°30'N 119°35'W; LEM]. W[est] Summerland [Summerland, 49°36'N 119°40'W; SEM]. Dichochrysa perfecta occurs in Canada, in the southern interior of British Columbia. All Canadian localities reported in literature have been authenticated. One potentially misleading report, i.e., Smith (1932, as Chrysopa cockerelli; cited by Penny et al. 1997, as Pseudomallada perfectus), traces back to a specimen now referred to Meleoma emuncta (which see, below). All specimens reported here are documented with data in Garland (1982 [1984]), or as new records (above). This is one of five species of Chrysopidae that have been designated as potentially rare and endangered in British Columbia (Scudder 1994). Larvae of this species have been described (Smith 1922, as Chrysopa perfecta).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.007 |
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".