The biological affinity of <i><scp>A</scp>msassia</i>: new evidence from the <scp>O</scp>rdovician of <scp>N</scp>orth <scp>C</scp>hina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A msassia shaanxiensis sp. nov. occurs in the M iddle O rdovician part of the J inghe F ormation in Y ongshou and the lower part of the U pper O rdovician B eiguoshan F ormation in L ongxian, S haanxi P rovince, north‐central C hina. In addition to module increase by bipartite longitudinal fission, which is also known in other species of A msassia , tripartite and rare quadripartite fission are recognized in A . shaanxiensis . All species previously assigned to L ichenaria from the M iddle to U pper O rdovician of S haanxi probably belong to A msassia . Therefore, A msassia , rather than the tabulate coral L ichenaria , should be credited as an important contributor to reef‐building in this area. Reports of L ichenaria from elsewhere in the N orth C hina P latform require confirmation in the light of the present study. Some morphological characteristics of A msassia are comparable to those of tabulate corals, tetradiids and chaetetid sponges. Consequently, various authors have assigned A msassia to the L ichenariida, T etradiida (now P rismostylales; florideophycean rhodophyte algae) and C haetetida. Other important characters, however, seem to exclude A msassia from those taxonomic groups. The phacelocerioid organization of modules having separate walls would not be expected in sponges. The basic symmetry of individuals may have been radial, unlike the tetramerous symmetry of tetradiids. Module increase by longitudinal fission, involving infoldings of the wall, is fundamentally different from modes of increase in corals, tetradiids and chaetetids. The skeleton was probably aragonitic, whereas that of tabulates was calcitic. The affinity of A msassia remains unresolved, but it is unlikely to have been a coral, tetradiid or sponge. Perhaps, like the tetradiids, A msassia was an alga.
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 | 0.003 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".