Eremochrysa (Eremochrysa) canadensis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
EREMOCHRYSA (EREMOCHRYSA) CANADENSIS (Banks, 1911) Chrysopa canadensis Banks, 1911: 339–340. Type: female; CANADA: Go Home, Lake Huron [Ontario]; monotypy; MCZ No. 11379 [examined]. Eremochrysa (Lolochrysa) canadensis (Banks, 1911): Banks 1950: 64–67. Eremochrysa (Eremochrysa) canadensis (Banks, 1911): Brooks and Barnard 1990: 272. SYNONYMY PERTAINING TO CANADA Chrysopa canadensis: Banks 1911: 339–340; Gibson 1912: 110; Smith 1932: 591. Eremochrysa canadensis: Banks 1950: 64–67; Bickley and MacLeod 1956: 200; Throne 1971: 76; Garland 1982 [1984]: 105–109, 306–307, Figs. 15–22, 35, 74, Map 5; 1984: 94; 1985a: 737–751. Eremochrysa (Eremochrysa) canadensis: Penny et al. 1997: 54. CANADA: T = 4 (1♂, 2♀, 1?). FIRST RECORD: ON: 1♀, Go Home, 13.vii.1907 [collector unknown; MCZ]. FLIGHT PERIOD: July 13 (1907; Go Home ON)–August 2 (1956; Magnetawan ON). BC: T = 1 (♂). FIRST RECORD: 1♂, Penticton, at light, 16.vii.1976 (J.A. Garland) [LEM]. FLIGHT PERIOD: July 16 (1976; Penticton). LOCALITIES: Penticton [49°30'N 119°35'W; LEM]. ON: T = 2 (1♀, 1? [a forewing]). FIRST RECORD: 1♀, Go Home, 13.vii.1907 [collector unknown; MCZ 199]. FLIGHT PERIOD: July 13 (1907; Go Home)–August 2 (1956; Magnetawan, 6 mi [les] W). LOCALITIES: Go Home [45°00'N 79°56'W; MCZ]. Magnetawan, Parry Sound District, 6 mi [les] W [45°38'N 79°41'W; UMAA 200]. 197.Available from: http://research.amnh.org/invertzoo/types_db/details.php?specimen_id=7381 (October, 2006) 198. Paratype. Terminalia stored in glycerine in a microvial pinned below the specimen. QC: T = 1 (♀). FIRST RECORD: 1♀, Knowlton, 29.vii.1930 (L.J. Milne) [CNC]. FLIGHT PERIOD: July 29 (1930; Knowlton). LOCALITIES: Knowlton [45°13'02"N 72°31'01"W; CNC]. Eremochrysa canadensis occurs in Canada, in British Columbia, Ontario, and Quebec. All Canadian localities reported in literature have been authenticated. All specimens reported here are documented with data in Garland (1982 [1984]). Based on label data, adults come to light. In Canada, this species has an apparently disjunct distribution, which more collecting may resolve; in the eastern USA, it ranges from Wisconsin (Throne 1971) to Maine, Massachusetts and New Hampshire (Banks 1950), and south to Virginia (Roble and Flint 2001).
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.005 |
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".