MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144553566 · doi:10.1017/s0016756813000356

<i>Diandongosaurus acutidentatus</i>Shang, Wu &amp; Li, 2011 (Diapsida: Sauropterygia) and the relationships of Chinese eosauropterygians

2013· article· en· W2144553566 on OpenAlexaff
Tamaki Sato, Yen-Nien Cheng, Xiao‐Chun Wu, Hsi-Yin Shan

Bibliographic record

VenueGeological Magazine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsCanadian Museum of Nature
FundersNational Science Council
KeywordsCladogramSkullPelvic girdleAnatomyTaxonBiologyPhylogenetic treeCladeEvolutionary biologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Diandongosaurus acutidentatus Shang, Wu &amp; Li, 2011 is restudied on the basis of a new specimen. The new specimen provides further information on the palate of the skull, the shoulder girdle, the gastralia and hind limbs, and permits revision of the diagnosis. Newly added or modified diagnostic characters include the presence of a few small vomerine teeth, the presence of an ectopterygoid, lateral elements of gastralia distally swollen and curving dorsally, boomerang-shaped interclavicle and clavicle with a distinct anterolateral process. Slight variations in the vertebral counts, girdle morphology, and phalangeal formulae are attributed to the intraspecific variations. A revised phylogenetic analysis demonstrates that Diandongosaurus is closely related to the Nothosauroidea and that certain Chinese taxa (e.g. Keichousaurus ) previously affiliated with the Pachypleurosauridae are more closely related to the Nothosauroidea. The effect of inclusion or exclusion of fragmentary taxa in the phylogenetic analysis is observed in the branching pattern of the cladogram, but it has little effect on the morphological characterization of the major clades.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.005

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.193 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations24
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeological MagazineSame topicPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyFrench-language works237,207