MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079137925 · doi:10.1139/e05-020

Global correlation of the radiolarian faunal change across the TriassicJurassic boundary

2005· article· en· W2079137925 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Elizabeth S. Carter, Rie S. Hori

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyPaleontologyFaunaSedimentary rockRidgeBiostratigraphyCarbonate platformSedimentationFaciesSedimentBiologyEcologyStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Precise comparison of the change in radiolarian faunas 3.5 m above a U–Pb zircon dated 199.6 ± 0.3 Ma tuff and approximately coincident with a negative δ 13 C anomaly in the Queen Charlotte Islands, B.C. (Canada) with Inuyama (Japan) sequences indicates that major global changes occurred across the Triassic–Jurassic (T–J) boundary. Nearly 20 genera and over 130 Rhaetian species disappeared at the end of the Triassic. The index genera Betraccium and Risella disappear and the final appearance of Globolaxtorum tozeri, Livarella valida, and Pseudohagiastrum giganteum sp. nov. are also diagnostic for the end of the Triassic. The low-diversity Hettangian survival fauna immediately above the boundary is composed mainly of small, primitive spumellarians with spongy or irregularly latticed meshwork and rod-like spines, and new genera Charlottea, Udalia, and Parahsuum s.l. first appear in the lowest Hettangian in both localities. Irrespective of different sedimentation rates and sedimentary environments, such as shelf to upper slope (Queen Charlotte Islands) and deep sea below carbonate compensation depth (CCD; Inuyama), radiolarians show a similar turnover pattern at the T–J boundary.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.713
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations86
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207