MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Finite-element analysis of simulated ammonoid septa (extinct Cephalopoda): septal and sutural complexities do not reduce strength

2002· article· en· W2097027987 on OpenAlexaff
Marwan Hassan, Gerd E. G. Westermann, Roger A. Hewitt, Mohamed Dokainish

Bibliographic record

VenuePaleobiology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCephalopods and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyPaleontologyAnatomyMesozoicFinite element methodRADIUSCurvatureStructural basinBiologyGeometryStructural engineeringMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Finite-element analysis of circular septum models indicates that (1) anticlastic fluting weakened the last septa of the same radius of curvature by a factor of about 2.5 relative to the tensile stresses in a sphere of nacre, (2) septa with ammonitic sutures were stronger than those with goniatitic sutures of the same thickness, and (3) septa with more “complex” ammonitic sutures were stronger at the edge between lobes and saddles than “simple” ones. These results contradict recent claims that ammonoid septa became weaker as sutural complexity increased from goniatitic through ammonitic, so that the most complex sutures were limited to the shallowest habitats. The smaller marginal flutes of complex septa were relatively strong, allowing them to be thinner than the central septum and still act as elastic wall supports. Many Mesozoic ammonoids with highly sinuous sutures occurred in deep epeiric and open-ocean habitats, whereas it is those with secondarily reduced, ceratitic sutures that were typically associated with restricted shallow basins.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations55
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaleobiologySame topicCephalopods and Marine BiologyFrench-language works237,207