MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116097273 · doi:10.1139/e10-073

New information on olenelline trilobites from the Cambrian Sekwi Formation in northwestern Canada

2010· article· en· W2116097273 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Francine R. Abe, Bruce S. Lieberman, Michael C. Pope, Kelly A. Dilliard

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAurora Research InstituteNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTrilobiteLaurentiaPaleontologyGeologyFaciesStructural basinStage (stratigraphy)Series (stratigraphy)PaleozoicOrdovician

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new species of olenelline trilobite, Nevadella keelensis , is described from the Early Cambrian (Cambrian Series 2, Stage 3) in the Sekwi Formation, Mackenzie Mountains, Canada. The difficulty in discerning between Nevadia Walcott, 1910 and Nevadella Raw, 1936 is discussed, and a revision of the two genera is suggested, particularly with the addition of Nevadella keelensis n. sp. A holmiid trilobite, perhaps conspecific with Esmeraldina rowei (Walcott, 1910), was also confirmed from the same locality. The E. sp. aff. rowei represents the narrow form of a species known for great variability in cephalic form. The trilobite material comes from a low diversity, shallow water, peritidal facies that was not sampled in previous studies of Cambrian fossils in the area, and could prove useful in facilitating biostratigraphic correlation across the Selwyn Basin and with other parts of Laurentia as well.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 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
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207