Case 3869 – Platyptera Meigen, 1803 and Rhamphomyia Meigen, 1822 (Insecta, Diptera, Empididae): conservation of usage of the generic names by designation of Empis borealis Linnaeus, 1758 as the type species of Platyptera
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this application, under Article 70.2 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, is to conserve the current usage of the generic names Platyptera Meigen, 1803 (currently a subgenus of Empis Linnaeus, 1758) and Rhamphomyia Meigen, 1822, two well-established genus-group names of empidid flies. The type species of Platyptera had long been assumed to be Empis borealis Linnaeus, 1758, designated by Melander in 1928. However, the correct type species, by absolute tautonymy, is Empis platyptera Panzer, 1794, which is currently recognized as a valid species of Rhamphomyia Meigen, 1822. Acceptance of the tautonymic fixation would threaten stability of nomenclature and taxonomy for the common and widely distributed nominal genus Rhamphomyia Meigen, 1822 by making it a junior synonym of Platyptera Meigen, 1803, thus requiring a new genus to be proposed for species currently in Platyptera, as there would be no available name for this group of species.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.012 |
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".