Mammalian tooth marks on the bones of dinosaurs and other Late Cretaceous vertebrates
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: We describe bones from the Late Cretaceous of Alberta – including bones of large dinosaurs, a femur from the aquatic reptile Champsosaurus, and a dentary from the marsupial Eodelphis– that bear tooth marks made by animals with opposing pairs of teeth. Of the animals known from the Late Cretaceous of North America, only mammals are capable of making such tooth marks. In particular, multituberculates, which have paired upper and lower incisors, are the most likely candidates for the makers of these traces. The traces described here represent the oldest known mammalian tooth marks. Although it is possible that some of these tooth marks represent feeding traces, the tooth marks often penetrate deep into the dense cortices of the bone. This raises the possibility that, much as extant mammals gnaw bone and antler, some Cretaceous mammals may have consumed the bones of dinosaurs and other vertebrates as a source of minerals. However, none of the tooth marks described here resemble the extensive gnaw traces produced by Cenozoic multituberculates or rodents. This suggests that specialized gnawing forms may have been rare or absent in the Late Cretaceous of North America.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it