Report on the fish otolith collection at the Nova Scotia Museum of Natural History (Curatorial Report #105)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fish otoliths, commonly called earbones or earstones are often the only identifiable remnants of fish in the archeological or paleontological record. Each species has uniquely-shaped otoliths, which have been found to correlate (through morphometric analysis) with standard measurements of the fish from which they came. This report outlines the findings of the analysis of the otolith collection comprising samples from 976 specimens of 62 species belonging to 28 families of fish collected by the author. The analysis compares the sex, length and weight of the individual species with a defined set of otolith measurements, with descriptions of the respective otoliths and correlations between fish length and otolith size. A description is also provided for each species including otolith morphology and micrographs. These specimens represent collections from selected freshwaters in Canada (Ontario), North Atlantic waters, marine waters off British Columbia and the Northwest Territories as well as from marine waters off Florida and Argentina. All specimens described and measured have been deposited in the Zoology collection of the Nova Scotia Museum in Halifax.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.164 | 0.059 |
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".