Monophyly and affinities of albanerpetontid amphibians (Temnospondyli; Lissamphibia)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Albanerpetontidae are Middle Jurassic-Miocene amphibians that have variously been regarded as caudates (salamanders), a clade distinct from caudates, or incertae sedis lissamphibians. Here I test for monophyly of the Albanerpetontidae and examine the affinities of the group, within the framework of a more inclusive Temnospondyli, by performing a cladistic analysis using 59 informative characters scored for four non-lissamphibian temnospondyl genera, stem- and crown-clade caudates, salientians (frogs), gymnophionans (caecilians), and the two recognized albanerpetontid genera Albanerpeton and Celtedens. Monophyly of the Albanerpetontidae is corroborated. I interpret synapomorphies of the marginal teeth (non-pedicellate; crowns chisel like, labiolingually compressed, with three mesiodistally aligned cuspules) in albanerpetontids as being associated with a shearing bite. Other synapomorphies evidently strengthened and increased the mobility of the skull, mandible, and cervical region for burrowing, feeding, or both. Nested sets of synapomorphies place the Albanerpetontidae within the Lissamphibia, as the sistertaxon of Caudata plus Salientia. None of the 17 characters previously advanced as albanerpetontid-caudate synapomorphies convincingly places the Albanerpetontidae within the Caudata or allies the two groups as sistertaxa. Albanerpetontids are better interpreted not as aberrant caudates, but as a distinct clade of lissamphibians in which numerous apomorphies are superimposed upon an otherwise primitive lissamphibian body plan.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".