Acanthascus (Rhabdocalyptus) heteraster Okada 1932
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acanthascus (Rhabdocalyptus) heteraster Okada, 1932 Fig. 6; Suppl. Tab. 4. MATERIAL. IORAS 5 /2/3824: RV ‘ Akademik M.A. Lavrentyev’ – 75, ROV ‘ Comanche’, sta. 21, spec. 4, 55°28′58.8″ N 167°15′30.6″ E, 2849 m. DESCRIPTION. BODY. The preserved specimen is tubular, about 90 mm high, 50 mm in maximal diameter; the walls are 1–3 mm thick. Prostalia lateralia are hypodermal orthotropal (rarely parathropal) spiny pentactins irregularly distributed and protruding 1–4 mm over the dermal surface. REMARKS. The newly found specimen has spicules size parameter different from those of the type specimen described by Okada (1932) (see the Suppl. Tab. 4). The long ray of atrial hexactins (directed into the atrial cavity) in the new specimen is notably longer then those in previouse descriptions; discoctasters are of a single type and their minimal size is less than that in the type specimen and larger than the minimal size of this type of microsclere in a specimen described by Koltun (1967). The discoctasters in the new specimen are notably larger than the same type of discoctasters in the initial description, microdiscohexasters are absent and oxyoidal microscleres reach larger sizes. Nevertheless most spicule parameters of this new specimen correspond to A. (Rhabdocalyptus) heteraster much more then to other species of the subgenus and it seem more reasonable to expand the spicule parameters in the previous species then to create a new one. DISTRIBUTION. Bering Sea, off Pacific coast of Canada, 445–2849 m depth.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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.
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".