MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909553555 · doi:10.22179/revmacn.20.601

A late Furongian trilobite assemblage from the eastern Cordillera Oriental (Santa Rosita Formation; Jujuy, Argentina) and its biostratigraphic significance

2018· article· en· W2909553555 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Franco Tortello, Fernando J. Zeballo, Daniela Monti

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista del Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEvolution and Paleontology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad Nacional de TucumánUniversidad Nacional de La PlataConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
KeywordsTrilobiteConodontBiozonePaleontologyGeologyBiostratigraphyFaunaAssemblage (archaeology)OrdovicianEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The trilobite Parabolina frequens argentina Zone is widely represented in the upper Furongian of northwestern Argentina. A fossil assemblage from the lower Santa Rosita Formation at Quebrada de Abra Blanca, Jujuy Province, is described herein. Parabolina frequens argentina (Kayser) and Parabolinella coelatifrons Harrington & Leanza have previously been reported from other localities of the biozone, whereas Lotagnostus hedini (Troedsson) is here described from South America for the first time. The latter provides high resolution data on the age of the P . frequens argentina Zone in the eastern Cordillera Oriental, where conodont-bearing strata have not been found yet. L . hedini exhibits a short biostratigraphic range, restricted to the latest Furongian of China (Xinjiang, Bulbolenus Zone; western Zhejiang, Lotagnostus hedini Zone), Kazakhstan ( Euloma limitaris - Taoyuania Zone) and ?Canada (western Newfoundland, Phylacterus saylesi Fauna). In China and Kazakhstan, it occurs in association with, or a few meters below, the first appearance of the conodont Cordylodus proavus ; a fact that increases the potential for global correlation.

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)0.000
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.846

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista del Museo Argentino de Ciencias NaturalesSame topicEvolution and Paleontology StudiesFrench-language works237,207