MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Major Questions in the Study of Primate Origins

2017· article· en· W2522792278 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrimateFossil RecordEnthusiasmMacroevolutionBiologyEvolutionary biologyEcologyPaleontologyPhylogenetic treePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerous factors have stimulated new enthusiasm for understanding the process of primate origins, including new fossil discoveries, improvements to methods for analyzing molecular data, and technological advances. These novel approaches have led to a better appreciation of the complexities of early primate evolution. Eight fundamental questions provide a framework for thinking about these issues. Among these topics are the phylogenetic position of Primates in Mammalia and the membership of particular fossil groups in the order. Also of central interest are questions about early primate ecology and anatomy such as the ancestral body mass, diet, locomotor mode, interactions with predators, and brain size and form. And finally, considerations of the paleontological record need to be informed by the most relevant living models, which help flesh out the story that is being told by fossils. Although much is known about all of these areas, fundamental questions still remain.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.337 · 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