MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031162338 · doi:10.1139/e10-057

A history of <i>Albertosaurus</i> discoveries in Alberta, CanadaThis article is one of a series of papers published in this Special Issue on the theme <i>Albertosaurus</i>.

2010· article· en· W2031162338 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Darren H. Tanke, Philip J. Currie

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsRoyal Tyrrell MuseumUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfusionCanyonHorseshoe (symbol)ArchaeologyTaxonGeologyGenusPaleontologyGeographyRange (aeronautics)Theme (computing)ZoologyCartographyBiologyEpistemologyComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After many years of taxonomic uncertainty, Albertosaurus was established as a new genus in 1905, the year Alberta became a province of Canada. Gorgosaurus is a closely related tyrannosaurid from the Judithian beds of southern Alberta that was subsequently synonymized with Albertosaurus. Although most researchers consider the genera as distinct, there has been considerable confusion over the temporal and geographic range of Albertosaurus. Albertosaurus sarcophagus is only known from 13 skulls and (or) skeletons of varying completeness, and one (possibly two) bonebeds, all from the Horseshoe Canyon Formation (Campanian–Maastrichtian) of Alberta. Many of the major Albertosaurus specimens are scientifically compromised due to poor collection techniques, incomplete locality and stratigraphic information, politics, vandalism, accidents, gunplay, and landowner issues. The background of each specimen is discussed to eliminate some of the sources of confusion and to document how much of each specimen is preserved.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.553

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0090.014
Science and technology studies0.0110.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.169 · 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

Citations13
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyFrench-language works237,207