MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049849518 · doi:10.1002/dvdy.20716

Comparative ontogeny and phylogeny of the upper jaw skeleton in amniotes

2006· review· en· W2049849518 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Dynamics · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Topicdental development and anomalies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmnioteBiologyOntogenyOssificationAnatomyEvolutionary biologyPhylogeneticsSkeleton (computer programming)Evolutionary developmental biologyMorphology (biology)ZoologyVertebrateGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The morphology, position, and presence of the upper jaw bones vary greatly across amniote taxa. In this review, we compare the development and anatomy of upper jaw bones from the three living amniote groups: reptiles, birds, and mammals. The study of reptiles is particularly important as comparatively little is known about the embryogenesis of the jaw in this group. Our review covers the ontogeny and phylogeny of membranous bones in the face. The aim is to identify conserved embryonic processes that may exist among the three major amniote groups. Finally, we discuss how temporal and spatial regulation of preosseous condensations and ossification centers can lead to variation in the morphology of amniote upper jaw bones.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.260 · 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