MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323906791 · doi:10.1139/e2012-046

Reassessment of the problematic Burgess Shale sponge <i>Takakkawia lineata</i> Walcott, 1920

2012· article· en· W2323906791 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Joseph P. Botting

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMarine Sponges and Natural Products
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSponge spiculePaleontologySpongeGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The monotypic Burgess Shale sponge genus Takakkawia Walcott, 1920, has been previously assigned to the Protomonaxonida, despite showing several unique features. A reassessment of the genus, including restudy of previously described material and the addition of new material that includes partially disarticulated specimens, has allowed a greatly modified understanding of its structure. The sponge possessed four primary columns (each divided into two) of highly modified spicules, with an outer organic layer extended into a unique, complex flange that shows a fine microstructure. The flanges within one column overlap to give the impression of radial fins, and each column is surmounted by an enlarged marginal spicule of similar morphology. Multi-rayed spicules are present both within the primary column architecture and as marginalia lining the osculum. The architecture most closely resembles Metaxyspongia Wu et al., 2005, which is placed into the Takakkawiidae. This restudy supports an interpretation of the family as a very early-branching sponge lineage, diverging within the early stem group of Silicea or prior to the separation of Calcarea and Silicea.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations5
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicMarine Sponges and Natural ProductsFrench-language works237,207