MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2558589169 · doi:10.1016/j.yqres.2016.08.005

A key site for inferring the timing of dispersal of giant deer in Sardinia, the Su Fossu de Cannas cave, Sadali, Italy

2016· article· en· W2558589169 on OpenAlexaff
Rita Teresa Melis, María Rita Palombo, Bassam Ghaleb, Serafino Meloni

Bibliographic record

VenueQuaternary Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEvolution and Paleontology Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersUniversità di CagliariUniversità degli Studi di Cagliari
KeywordsCaveGeologyPaleontologyNeogeneBiological dispersalPleistoceneQuaternaryPlateau (mathematics)TaphonomyArchaeologyGeographyStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Su Fossu de Cannas (SFC) cave is one of several known cavities in the Sadali plateau in Sardinia, Italy. The evolution of the cave is the result of complex erosional and deposital processes that occurred during the Neogene and Quaternary. A fossiliferous cemented conglomerate, containing various deer remains, now forms the ceiling of a cavity (tunnel). The faunal remains belong to a large cervid, which show some morphological affinity with large deer that have an endemic Sardinian lineage ( Praemegaceros sardous — Praemegaceros cazioti ). Palaeoecological data based on some peculiar features and the large size of the SFC deer suggest that it is the most primitive Megacerine found in Sardinia to date, and the first representative of the endemic lineage. The 450 ka U—Th age for the flowstone capping the fossiliferous layer defines: the end of sedimentation in which Sadali deer remains are preserved; and the dispersal from the mainland of the ancestor of the endemic Sardinian Megacerini. Stratigraphic and micromorphological analyses of the cave deposits allow the reconstruction of the timing of the cave’s development throughout the Pliocene to the Holocene.

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)0.002
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 score0.110
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQuaternary ResearchSame topicEvolution and Paleontology StudiesFrench-language works237,207