Bibliographic record
Abstract
2. Biological Data 2.1 Distribution: Camel/ia chrysantha has a restricted distribution occurring in China where it is confined to Nanning, Youngning, Fangeheng, Fusui and Long’an counties of the Guangxi region. It is also reported from Vietnam. 2.2 Population: It is described as rare in the China Red Data book (1992). 2.3 Habitat: In China it is occurs in moist shady forested gullies and along the stream sides of hills and mountains from 50- 500 metres. Soils are mainly sandstone and shale. C. chrysantha prefers shaded habitats with high relative humidity (78-83%) but can tolerate bright sunlight. 3. Trade Data 3.1 National Utilisation: C. chrysantha was first described in 1965 and was immediately recognised for its ornamental qualities together with its breeding and hybridisation potential for the horticultural trade. Trade within the UK is negligible. Only two nurseries in the UK listed C. chrysantha in 1992/93 and in 1993/94 this species is listed as C. nitidissinia var. nitidissinia. It is reported that the biggest distributor of camellias in the UK sells only five plants per year (Piers Trehane pers. conim. 1994). In Germany the 1990 Pfianzen Einkaufsführer has only one nursery listed for C. chrysantha. Ten-Year-Review page-41-3.2 Legal International Trade: In 1986 two plants were exported from Japan to the Netherlands, in 1987 (source-artificially propagated; purpose-trade), China exported eight plants to Japan (source and purpose not stated). In 1990 the United States of America exported one plant to Canada and one plant to Spain (source-artificially propagated; purpose-trade). These are the only exports recorded (WCMC 1994). Imports reported for 1990 stated that Denmark imported 2 plants from Japan-source given as
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.578 | 0.393 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".