A Reevaluation of Sexual Dimorphism in the Postcranium of the Chasmosaurine Ceratopsid <em>Chasmosaurus belli</em> (Dinosauria: Ornithischia)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The sexual dimorphism attributed to Chasmosaurus belli by Sternberg (1927) is revisited and reevaluated. A reexamination of the two specimens originally considered by Sternberg reveals that they are less complete than first suggested, with only a moderate amount of overlapping material between them. Only a few of the postcranial elements (humeri, sternal plates, and presacral vertebrae) show evidence of dimorphism, the significance of which is either doubtful or equivocal. Instead of representing sexual dimorphs, it is likely that the two specimens belong to separate species, C. belli and C. russelli, as evidenced by their distinct frill morphologies and by their stratigraphic segregation within the Dinosaur Park Formation of Alberta. These findings emphasize the need to remain sceptical about claims advocating sexual dimorphism in the fossil record in the absence of statistical significance or stratigraphic control.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".