MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153924069 · doi:10.1139/e06-007

A second enantiornithean (Aves: Ornithothoraces) wing from the Early Cretaceous Xiagou Formation near Changma, Gansu Province, People's Republic of China

2006· article· en· W2153924069 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jerald D. Harris, Matthew C. Lamanna, Hai‐Lu You, JI Shu'an, Qiang Ji

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChinese Academy of Geological SciencesChina Geological SurveyMinistry of Land and Resources of the People's Republic of ChinaChinese Academy of Sciences
KeywordsManusGeologyCretaceousPaleontologyHumerusUlnaPhalanxAnatomyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new specimen of an enantiornithean bird from the Lower Cretaceous Xiagou Formation of Gansu Province, northwestern China, consists of an articulated distal left humerus, ulna, radius, carpus, and manus. The specimen may represent a primitive enantiornithean because it lacks a longitudinal sulcus on the radius, has incompletely fused alular and major metacarpals, and possibly retains a remnant of a second phalanx on the minor digit. It differs from all other known enantiornitheans, and exhibits possible autapomorphies, including peculiar, flat humeral epicondyles, a pair of eminences on the distal minor metacarpal, and an enormous flexor tuberculum on the alular ungual. The specimen probably pertains to the same taxon as a previously described enantiornithean arm from Changma; the incompleteness of the taxon precludes erecting a new name, but it provides new information concerning enantiornithean diversity in the Early Cretaceous of central Asia.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations27
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyFrench-language works237,207