MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103777455 · doi:10.1002/spp2.1032

Triassic echinoids (Echinodermata) from the Aksala Formation, north Lake Laberge, Yukon Territory, Canada

2015· article· en· W2103777455 on OpenAlexaffabout
John‐Paul Zonneveld, Carolyn M. Furlong, Shelby C. Sanders

Bibliographic record

VenuePapers in Palaeontology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaleontologyTaxonGeologyOutcropEcological successionRange (aeronautics)BiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Late Triassic (Carnian–Norian) echinoids from the Aksala Formation in the Lake Laberge area of the Whitehorse Trough, Yukon Territory, Canada, are described. These echinoids comprise the first description of Triassic echinoids from Canada and, with the exception of fragmentary material from Utah, are the only Upper Triassic echinoids on the western coast of Pangaea north of Peru. Triassicidaris peruviensis Smith is identified from a coronal fragment that consists of an ambulacral column and five attached interambulacral plates from a Carnian outcrop succession. Parvicidaris sp., also from Carnian strata, is identified based on a coronal fragment that consists of two ambulacral and three interambulacral columns. This occurrence extends the range of this typically Norian taxon both north to the Yukon and earlier into the Carnian. Additional specimens, identified as Triassicidaris sp., occur within Norian strata of the Aksala taxa, one of which (‘ Cidaris ’ labergensis sp. nov.) is new. Both the corona‐based taxa and the spine form taxa show mixed affinities with Tethyan and southern New World populations and reinforce the association between Triassic echinoid faunas and reefal settings.

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)0.000
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 score0.450
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.198
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePapers in PalaeontologySame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207