Silurian lichid trilobites from northwestern Canada: Ontogeny and phylogeny of lichids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previously unknown ontogenies of five lichid genera,Dicranopeltis, Platylichas, Borealarges, DicranogmusandRadiolichas, are described and placed in the context provided by a review of known lichid ontogenies. Lichid phylogenies have been based on holaspid morphology alone without reference to ontogeny. To broaden knowledge of lichid phylogeny, an analysis, based on the last protaspid instar of lichids and possible sister group taxa, is conducted. The results of this analysis show that, within the lichids, the traditional subfamily groupings are not supported, and the sister group of lichids is more likely to be found within the Proetida than the Odontopleurida. Tubercles, a prominent feature of lichid morphology, have not been considered taxonomically significant. An examination suggests that tubercle arrangement and the pattern of change of tubercle arrangement through ontogeny could be important in defining taxa. It is recommended that future work on lichid phylogeny include ontogenetic information and patterns of change in development.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".