Data from: Relating Ediacaran fronds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ediacaran fronds are key components of terminal-Proterozoic ecosystems. They represent one of the most widespread and common body forms ranging across all major Ediacaran fossil localities and time slices postdating the Gaskiers glaciation, but uncertainty over their phylogenetic affinities has led to uncertainty over issues of homology and functional morphology between and within organisms displaying this ecomorphology. Here we present the first large-scale, multigroup cladistic analysis of Ediacaran organisms, sampling 20 ingroup taxa with previously asserted affinities to the Arboreomorpha, Erniettomorpha, and Rangeomorpha. Using a newly derived morphological character matrix that incorporates multiple axes of potential phylogenetically informative data, including architectural, developmental, and structural qualities, we seek to illuminate the evolutionary history of these organisms. We find strong support for existing classification schema and devise apomorphy-based definitions for each of the three frondose clades examined here. Through a rigorous cladistic framework it is possible to discern the pattern of evolution within and between these clades, including the identification of homoplasies and functional constraints. This work both validates earlier studies of Ediacaran groups and accentuates instances in which previous assumptions of their natural history are uninformative.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.005 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".