MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014947894 · doi:10.1163/15685403-00003349

Soft-body preservation in the leaiid clam shrimp (Branchiopoda, Diplostraca) and its palaeoecological implications

2014· article· en· W2014947894 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Frederick R. Schram

Bibliographic record

VenueCrustaceana · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermianBranchiopodaCarcinologyAnostracaPaleontologyIncertae sedisTaxonGenusCrustaceanMalacostracaBiologyAppendageShrimpZoologyEcologyDecapodaCladocera

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Leaiais a special genus of extinct “conchostracan” branchiopods; its soft parts have not been known until now. The leaiid specimens with soft bodies reported in the present paper came from two localities: the Upper Carboniferous Canso Group of New Brunswick, Canada, and the Permian Mount Glossopteris Formation of the Ohio Range, Holick Mountains, Antarctica. They include head, biramous antennae, mandible, shell gland, male claspers, and digestive tube. These parts together fully demonstrate that the leaiid clam shrimp indeed should be attributed to the crustaceans, instead of Mollusca. Based on the ribbed valves and structure of soft parts it should be placed in the branchiopodan Diplostraca. We believe that this group, which went extinct at the end of the Permian, is quite different from those of Laevicaudata, Spinicaudata, and Cyclestheriida. Hence, it should have its own higher taxon, Leaiina. The well-developed and sharply pointed head, delicate and short biramous antennae, in concert with the radial ribs on the valves probably indicate a burrowing in-faunal habit.

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations7
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrustaceanaSame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207