The ankylosaurid dinosaurs of the Upper Cretaceous Baruungoyot and Nemegt formations of Mongolia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The discovery of a new ankylosaurid skull with some unusual features from the Baruungoyot Formation of Mongolia prompted a systematic review of ankylosaurid specimens from the Baruungoyot and Nemegt formations. Dyoplosaurus giganteus was found to possess no diagnostic features and is regarded as a nomen dubium. The holotype of Tarchia kielanae (previously synonymized with Tarchia gigantea) has one autapomorphy, an accessory postorbital ossification with surrounding furrow, and Tar. kielanae is here considered a valid species, making the combination Tar. gigantea unnecessary. An accessory postorbital ossification is also found in the holotype of Minotaurasaurus ramachandrani, and this species is here considered a junior synonym of Tar. kielanae. The newly described skull from the Baruungoyot Formation forms the holotype of a new genus and species, Zaraapelta nomadis gen. et sp. nov., diagnosed by unusual bilayered ornamentation on the squamosal horn and extensive postocular ornamentation. Two distinct tail club handle morphotypes are present in the Nemegt Formation and probably represent two different species. However, it is impossible to assign either tail club morphotype to the single valid species from the formation, Saichania chulsanensis, because of a lack of overlapping material. A revised phylogenetic analysis including newly identified characters found Zaraapelta nomadis to be most closely related to Tar. kielanae. © 2014 The Linnean Society of London
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".