Comparative Osteology and Phylogenetic Relationship of<i>Edmontosaurus</i>and<i>Shantungosaurus</i>(Dinosauria: Hadrosauridae) from the Upper Cretaceous of North America and East Asia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The close affinity between Edmontosaurus and Shantungosaurus is corroborated on the basis of the following shared features: an occipital condyle deflected strongly posteroventrally; a posterodorsally reflected, lip-shaped oral margin of the premaxilla, with a deep, oval concavity at the anteromedial corner of the bone; a well-demarcated posterodorsal margin of the deeply excavated circumnarial fossa formed by a prominent arched ridge along the entire posterior half of the lateroventral border of the nasal; an anteroposteriorly broad jugal process of the postorbital; a strongly concave dorsal surface of the paired frontals; seven teeth per alveolus in the middle of the dentary tooth row; and a circular distal blade of the pubis that is much more expanded ventrally than dorsally. A revised phylogenetic analysis of Hadrosauroidea recovers a sister taxon relationship between Edmontosaurus and Shantungosaurus. Kerberosaurus is recovered as the sister taxon to the clade formed exclusively by these two genera. The clade Edmontosaurini could be defined as the least inclusive clade containing Kerberosaurus and Edmontosaurus, which is currently composed of the genera Kerberosaurus, Edmontosaurus, and Shantungosaurus. Zhuchengosaurus and Huaxiaosaurus, both from the Upper Cretaceous Wangshi Group in Zhucheng, are interpreted as junior synonyms of Shantungosaurus. Kundurosaurus is likewise considered a junior synonym of Kerberosaurus. The strict consensus tree together with biogeographic information indicates that the clade Edmontosaurini originated in Asia and subsequently dispersed into North America.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".