MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003789729 · doi:10.1111/2041-210x.12226

Body mass estimation in non‐avian bipeds using a theoretical conversion to quadruped stylopodial proportions

2014· article· en· W2003789729 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in Ecology and Evolution · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEvolution and Paleontology Studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal Tyrrell MuseumRoyal Ontario MuseumUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCircumferenceSet (abstract data type)EstimationEcologyBiologyMathematicsStatisticsComputer scienceEngineeringGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Body mass is strongly related to both physiological and ecological properties of living organisms. As a result, generating robust, broadly applicable models for estimating body mass in the fossil record provides the opportunity to reconstruct palaeobiology and investigate evolutionary ecology on a large temporal scale. A recent study provided strong evidence that the minimum circumference of stylopodial elements (humerus and femur) is conservatively associated with body mass in living quadrupeds. Unfortunately, this model is not directly applicable to extinct bipeds, such as non‐avian dinosaurs. This study presents a new equation that mathematically corrects the quadruped equation for use in bipeds. It is derived from the systemic difference in the circumference‐to‐area scaling relationship of two circles (hypothetical quadruped) and one circle (hypothetical biped), which represent the cross‐section of the main weight‐bearing limb bones. When applied to a newly constructed data set of femoral circumferences and body masses in living birds, the new equation reveals errors that are significantly lower than other published equations, but significantly higher than the error inherent in the avian data set. Such errors, however, are expected given the unique overall femoral circumference–body mass scaling relationship found in birds. Body mass estimates for a sample of bipedal dinosaurs using the new model are consistent with recent estimates based on volumetric life reconstructions, but, in contrast, this equation is simpler to use, with the concomitant potential to provide a wider set of body mass estimates for extinct bipeds. Although it is evident that no one estimation model is flawless, the combined use of the corrected quadrupedal equations and the previously published quadrupedal equation offer a consistent approach with which to estimate body masses in both quadrupeds and bipeds. These models have implications for conducting large‐scale macroevolutionary analyses of body size throughout the evolutionary history of terrestrial vertebrates, and, in particular, across major changes in body plan, such as the evolution of bipedality in archosaurs and quadrupedality in dinosaurs.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.323
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.312 · 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