MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976689373 · doi:10.1080/02724634.2013.791693

Four new basal acanthomorph fishes from the Late Cretaceous of Morocco

2014· article· en· W1976689373 on OpenAlexaff
Alison M. Murray, Mark V. H. Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vertebrate Paleontology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncertae sedisSPINE (molecular biology)PaleontologyCretaceousCenomanianBiologyActinopterygiiType localityGeologyTaxonZoologyFish <Actinopterygii>GenusFishery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Four new species of acanthomorph fishes are described, and three are named, from the Agoult locality of Morocco, which samples early Late Cretaceous marine deposits of the Akrabou Formation. Of the three new named species, two represent members of the subfamily Aipichthyoidea, based on possession of a caudal fin skeleton with a short, broad, neural spine on the second preural centrum, 19 principal caudal fin rays, and three supraneurals positioned close together in front of the first neural spine. The third named species is placed in the Polymixiiformes based on having a caudal fin with a long, full neural spine on the second preural centrum, and 18 principal caudal fin rays. The fourth species is too poorly preserved to name, but we describe the few details that are visible, and it remains incertae sedis within Acanthomorpha. These new taxa add to the diversity of morphologies seen in both the aipichthyoids and the polymixiiforms during the Cenomanian and Turonian throughout the Tethys Sea.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vertebrate PaleontologySame topicPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyFrench-language works237,207