Bibliographic record
Abstract
Key to the species of Guianacara 1a. Two supraneurals; produced lappets on tips of anterior dorsal-fin spines; dark midlateral bar present, or a faint midlateral bar with a darker midlateral spot ……………………………………(subgenus Guianacara) 2 1b. One supraneural; no produced lappets on tips of anterior dorsal-fin spines; midlateral bar absent, midlateral spot present………………………… Guianacara oelemariensis (subgenus Oelemaria) 2a. Midlateral bar thin, up to three scales wide at its widest point (two and a half to three scales at its widest point, always narrowing to one and a half or two scales at its thinnest point) ………………………………………………3 2b. Midlateral bar broad, at least three scales wide at its thinnest point (four scales at its widest point, sometimes narrowing to three scales) …………………………………4 3a. Branchiostegal membranes whitish; infraorbital stripe continuously dark across the cheek to the interopercle in adults and juveniles……………………………… G. cuyunii 3b. Branchiostegal membranes dusky; infraorbital stripe continuously dark across the cheek to the interopercle in juveniles, but faded from orbit to dorsal edge of preopercle in adults, forming a “teardrop” mark across the preopercle and interopercle…………………………………… G. dacrya 4a. Black pigmentation of anterior three dorsal-fin spines not retainedinadults…………………………………………….5 4b. Black pigmentation of anterior three dorsal-fin spines retainedinadults…………………………………………….6 5a. Midlateral bar uniform; white spots on dorsal-fin larger than darker markings surrounding them …………… G. geayi 5b. Midlateral bar not uniform, midlateral spot located above the upper lateral line; white spots on dorsal-fin smaller than darker markings surrounding them……. G. sphenozona 6a. Midlateral spot small, round; midlateral bar wedge shaped (thinner ventrally than dorsally) ……………… G. stergiosi 6b. Midlateral spot large, oval shaped; midlateral bar not wedge shape (uniform thickness) …………… G. owroewefi
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.085 | 0.015 |
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".