Determining the paleoclimate and elevation of the late Eocene Florissant flora: support from the coexistence approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Published estimates on the paleoclimate of the Florissant fossil beds site of Colorado (34.1 Ma) have led to extremely different estimates of paleoelevation. The purpose of this paper is to review the paleoclimate methods used and to add the coexistence approach (CA) method to estimate paleotemperature for the Florissant site. The basis of the CA method is the dependence on overlapping climatic requirements for different taxa in the flora and their nearest living relatives. These relationships tie the fossil identities to the actual plant habitats and climatic requirements of close relatives. Based on the CA method, we conclude that the mean annual temperature ranged between 14.3 and 18.2 °C. These results support the conclusions offered by several other studies that the Florissant was a warm temperate to subtropical flora, and they are consistent with recent conclusions by structural geologists as well as other studies, indicating that the Florissant site was deposited at a relatively low elevation, probably between 1 and 1.5 km.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".