Rodlets from Compressed Medullosalean Plant Fossils: Chemical and Morphological Studies (Late Pennsylvanian Sydney Coalfield, Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Fragmented compression specimens of medullosalean fronds have been voluminously described over the past 200 years. However, the literature on rodlets is scarce. We addressed the questions (i) of common occurrence in these fronds, (ii) what made the fronds so strong to bear such a biomassive load, and (iii) what is the chemical make up of rodlets that expressed as striae and ridges (medullosalean hallmark) occur on these fronds? Recovered were soluble and insoluble, black, round and flat, opaque or translucent rodlets that are up to 5 mm long and ca. 10-111 μm wide, and are typed as (i) transparent, (ii) insoluble, or (iii) soluble in Schulze’s solution. In situ insoluble rodlets can be distinguished from associate coal and cuticle-free compression foliage and rachides by relatively high aromaticity and low aliphatics, although their chemical composition is unknown. Rodlets are presumably related to sclerenchymatous tissue in support of strength/stability of these sizeable medullosalean fronds.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".