MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102598335 · doi:10.1144/0016-76492010-028

Palynological evidence for Pennsylvanian extra-basinal vegetation in Atlantic Canada

2011· article· en· W2102598335 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tatyana K. Dimitrova, Christopher J. Cleal, Barry A. Thomas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Geological Society · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPennsylvanianPalynologyGeologyPaleontologyVegetation (pathology)PollenEcologyStructural basinBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Pollen preserved in latest Westphalian and early Stephanian clastic deposits of the Sydney Coalfield, Cape Breton Island, suggest that there were zones of different vegetational habitats surrounding the wetlands where the coal-forming peat was formed. On the margins of the wetlands was a narrow band with large cordaitanthacean trees. This was surrounded by ‘occasionally dry' habitats supporting Schuetzia -plants, ruflorioid-plants and Aethophyllum -like herbaceous conifers. Around this were mesic or seasonally dry habitats, dominated by walchian conifers and disaccate-producing peltasperms. These in turn were surrounded by xeric or seasonally wet habitats, dominated by ullmanniacean-like conifers, cycads and monosaccate-producing peltasperms. During latest Westphalian and early Stephanian times, the mesic and xeric habitats encroached nearer the wetlands, although the vegetation of the wetlands themselves remained essentially unaffected. This vegetation change was not a response to climate change, but probably to changing drainage patterns and topography in the surrounding hinterland. The Florinites -producing cordaitanthaceans appear not to have been upland trees, as previously suggested, but occupied mainly coastal habitats, or riparian habitats on the margins of the wetlands.

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)0.001
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 score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.164 · 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

Citations36
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Geological SocietySame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207