Bibliographic record
Abstract
Upper Cretaceous dinosaur bonebeds are common in Alberta, Canada, and have attracted continuous scientific attention since the 1960s. Since its inception, the Royal Tyrrell Museum of Palaeontology has documented the presence of hundreds of these sites and has been involved directly in the scientific study of many tens. Because many of these bonebeds have been used to address questions about the paleobiology and paleoecology of dinosaurs, questions have arisen about bonebed origins and preservation in the Cretaceous of Alberta. This study of 260 bonebeds delineates broad paleoenvironmental settings and associations, and taphonomic signatures of assemblages as a first step in assessing patterns of dinosaur bonebed origins in the Upper Cretaceous of Alberta. Bonebeds are known predominantly from the Belly River Group and the Horseshoe Canyon, lower St. Mary River, Wapiti, and Scollard formations. In these units, bonebeds are mostly associated with river channel and alluvial wetland settings that were influenced by a subtropical to warm-temperate, monsoonal climate. Most bonebeds formed in response to flooding events capable of killing dinosaurs, reworking and modifying skeletal remains, and burying taphocoenoses. The “coastal-plain-flooding hypothesis,” proposed in 2005, suggested that many bonebeds in the Dinosaur Park Formation formed in response to the effects of recurring coastal-plain floods that submerged vast areas of ancient southern Alberta on a seasonal basis. It remains the best mechanism to explain how many of the bonebeds were formed and preserved at Dinosaur Provincial Park, and here, is proposed as the mechanism that best explains bonebed origins in other Upper Cretaceous formations across central and southern Alberta.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".