A Curious<i>Rusophycus</i>(Arthropod Ichnofossil) Assemblage from the Upper Ordovician of Ontario, Canada
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
The ichnogenus Rusophycus includes a wide range of short bilobate excavations generally attributed to variable feeding behaviors of arthropods, especially trilobites. An unusual Rusophycus assemblage from Upper Ordovician Georgian Bay Formation in Ontario departs radically from previously described examples and presents new challenges for understanding the behavior represented by these traces. This specimen is unique in the arrangement of multiple Rusophycus burrows in a circular, lens-shaped array (as opposed to a linear or random arrangement typical of other Rusophycus assemblages). The size and shape of the individual Rusophycus components are consistent with traces attributed to the coeval trilobite Flexicalymene. Multiple Rusophycus assemblages likely reflect aggregations of trilobites in response to a local concentration of food. The topology of this particular Rusophycus assemblage suggests that the trilobites opportunistically exploited a rich and narrowly restricted food source, perhaps the decaying remains of a buried organism.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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