MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2191709205 · doi:10.1139/cjes-2015-0099

Frontal bones of non-avian theropod dinosaurs from the Upper Cretaceous (Santonian–?Campanian) Bostobe Formation of the northeastern Aral Sea region, Kazakhstan

2015· article· en· W2191709205 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alexander O. Averianov

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCore Research for Evolutional Science and Technology
KeywordsGeologyPaleontologyCretaceousCenomanianFossa

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three theropod taxa have been identified based on isolated frontal bones from the Santonian–?Campanian Bostobe Formation at the Shakh-Shakh locality, in the northeastern Aral Sea region of Kazakhstan. A frontal referable to Ornithomimosauria indet. is distinct in having a slightly pronounced cerebral dome. A frontal of an unidentified therizinosaur resembles the element in Erlikosaurus (Cenomanian—Turonian of Mongolia) in most features, but it differs in having an anterolateral prong along the orbital rim, a less-developed facet for contact with the prefrontal, and a larger depression for the cerebral hemisphere. A frontal identifiable as Troodontidae indet. differs from that of Troodon (Campanian—Maastrichtian of North America) and resembles that of the Mongolian Campanian Gobivenator in having a larger supratemporal fossa and the anterior process of the parietals wedged between the frontals. This specimen is the first reliable record for Troodontidae from the Bostobe Formation.

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 score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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