The Braincase of the Theropod Dinosaur Murusraptor: Osteology, Neuroanatomy and Comments on the Paleobiological Implications of Certain Endocranial Features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A detailed description of the neuroanatomy of Murusraptor barrosaensis—a mid-sized non-maniraptoran theropod from the Late Cretaceous of north Patagonia—is based on the exceptionally preserved type braincase. CT scans provide new information on the braincase, brain, cranial nerves, encephalic vasculature, and inner ear of this taxon. Worldwide, relatively few non-maniraptoran theropod braincases have been described in detail and the new information reported here is important to better understand the variability of braincase characters within the clade. This study suggests that megaraptorids have a particular brain pattern that is different from those of other non-coelurosaur theropods, such as allosauroids and ceratosaurs, and different from that of some coelurosaurs, such as tyrannosaurids, although sharing more similarities with the latter. The Reptile Encephalization Quotient of Murusraptor is within a range between those of Allosaurus and Tyrannosaurus; the Olfactory Ratio is, however, smaller than the observed in tyrannosaurids and allosauroids. The paleobiological implications on gaze stabilization, hearing, and olfaction in the Argentinean taxon are still poorly understood.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".