MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2462810617 · doi:10.1111/1755-6724.12723

A New Species of <i>Amsassia</i> from the Ordovician of Korea and South China: Paleobiological and Paleogeographical Significance

2016· article· en· W2462810617 on OpenAlexaff
Mirinae Lee, Heeju Park, Nguyen Viet Tien, Suk‐Joo Choh, Robert J. Elias, Dong‐Jin LEE

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Geologica Sinica - English Edition · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrdovicianBiozonePaleontologyGenusGeologyFissionPeninsulaChinaBlock (permutation group theory)GeographyStructural basinEcologyBiologyArchaeologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new species of the probable calcareous alga Amsassia, A. koreanensis , is recognized from the Duwibong Formation (Middle Ordovician, Darriwilian) of the Taebaeksan Basin in mid‐eastern Korea. This is the first report of the genus from the Korean Peninsula, expanding its geographical range to the eastern Sino‐Korean Block. The new species also occurs in the Xiazhen Formation (Upper Ordovician, Katian) at Zhuzhai in the South China Block. Amsassia koreanensis is the smallest species of this modular genus, having a maximum module diameter of 0.28 mm. Module increase is by bipartite, tripartite and quadripartite types of longitudinal axial fission, but unlike other species of the genus, quadripartite fission is common. The types of fission are comparable to those in some Tetradiida (now Prismostylales, florideophycean rhodophyte algae), although the processes of fission are different. The distribution of A. koreanensis further strengthens the biogeographical connection between the Sino‐Korean and South China blocks, suggesting that these two paleocontinents were located closer together during the Middle to Late Ordovician than previously speculated.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.691

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Geologica Sinica - English EditionSame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207