MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2146731604 · doi:10.1139/e07-028

Nucularcidae: a new family of palaeotaxodont Ordovician pelecypods (Mollusca) from North America and Australia

2007· article· en· W2146731604 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
John Pojeta, Christopher A. Stott

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrdovicianSynonym (taxonomy)PaleontologyGenusGeologyBalticaType speciesDentitionBiostratigraphyBiozoneZoologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The new Ordovician palaeotaxodont family Nucularcidae and the new genus Nucularca are described. Included in Nucularca are four previously described species that have taxodont dentition: N. cingulata (Ulrich) (the type species), N. pectunculoides (Hall), N. lorrainensis (Foerste), and N. gorensis (Foerste). All four species are of Late Ordovician (Cincinnatian Katian) age and occur in eastern Canada and the northeastern USA. Ctenodonta borealis Foerste is regarded as a subjective synonym of Nucularca lorrainensis. No new species names are proposed. The Nucularcidae includes the genera Nucularca and Sthenodonta Pojeta and Gilbert-Tomlinson (1977). Sthenodonta occurs in central Australia in rocks of Middle Ordovician (Darriwilian) age. The 12 family group names previously proposed for Ordovician palaeotaxodonts having taxodont dentition are reviewed and evaluated in the Appendix.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations9
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences→Same topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils→French-language works237,207→