MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333945315 · doi:10.1017/s001675681300071x

Late Visean – early Serpukhovian conodont succession at the Naqing (Nashui) section in Guizhou, South China

2013· article· en· W2333945315 on OpenAlexaff
Yuping Qi, Tamara I. Nemyrovska, Xiangdong Wang, Jitao Chen, H. Richard Lane, B C Richards, Keyi Hu, Qiulai Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueGeological Magazine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConodontViséanGeologyPaleontologySection (typography)Ecological successionBiostratigraphyGlobal Boundary Stratotype Section and PointStratotypeCarboniferousStage (stratigraphy)Structural basinBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study reports the conodont succession across the Visean–Serpukhovian (V/S) boundary interval at the Naqing section, South China. Continuous centimetre-scale sampling of the relatively deep-water section in recent years has provided new data for a more detailed biostratigraphy of conodonts across the Visean–Serpukhovian boundary. Three conodont zones were described in ascending order: the Gnathodus bilineatus, Lochriea nodosa and Lochriea ziegleri zones. The first appearance datum (FAD) of L. ziegleri has been moved down to 60.1 m above the base of the Naqing section. The correlation of the conodont succession across the Visean–Serpukhovian boundary in the Naqing section with other sections in Eurasia is discussed.

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 score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.216

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations41
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeological MagazineSame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207