MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949308336 · doi:10.5334/oq.64

First Fossils of Hyenas (<i>Chasmaporthetes</i>, Hyaenidae, Carnivora) from North of the Arctic Circle

2019· article· en· W2949308336 on OpenAlexaffabout
Z. Jack Tseng, Grant D. Zazula, Lars Werdelin

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Quaternary · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEvolution and Paleontology Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Museum of Nature
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeringiaArcticCarnivoreGeographyMegafaunaPleistoceneMammalEcologyFossil RecordArchaeologyPaleontologyPredationGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The northern region of Beringia is ecologically and biogeographically significant as a corridor for biotic dispersals between the Old and New Worlds. Large mammalian predators from Beringia are exceedingly rare in the fossil record, even though carnivore diversity in the past was much higher than it is in this region at present. Here we report the first fossils of cursorial hyenas, Chasmaporthetes, in Beringia and north of the Arctic Circle. Two isolated teeth recovered in the Old Crow Basin, Yukon Territory, Canada, were identified amongst over 50,000 known fossil mammal specimens recovered from over a century of collecting in the Old Crow Basin. These rare records fill an important intermediary locale in the more than 10,000 km geographic distance between previously known New and Old World records of this lineage. The Pleistocene age of these fossils, together with its Arctic Circle occurrence, necessitate a rethinking of the role of large-bodied hunter-scavengers in Ice Age megafaunas in North America, and the implications of lacking an important energy flow modifier in present day North American food webs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen QuaternarySame topicEvolution and Paleontology StudiesFrench-language works237,207