Bibliographic record
Abstract
Development of the present classification scheme of the class Hexactinellida was delayed because authors of the early species descriptions did not figure their specimens and few of them had access to compound microscopes necessary to visualize characters important in determining relationships. When microscopic information on spicule symmetry became available, Wyville Thomson in 1868 recognized the distinctive triaxial symmetry of the group and named it Vitrea. Schmidt's 1870 name, Hexactinellidae, was without the contamination associated with Thomson's Vitrea, and gained widespread support. Through a series of proposals and refinements, the present scheme recognizes two main lineages, Amphidiscophora and Hexasterophora, differing in shape and type of their microscleres. Since these structures are generally not retained in fossil material, paleontologists have long had an independent classification for hexactinellids, but the trend to unify the systems is now nearly complete. Hypotheses on phylogeny of the group remain virtually dependent upon scarce paleontological information, pending data from nucleic acid and protein sequence analyses that are not yet available for unravelling relationships among hexactinellids.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".