The “earliest tabulate corals” are not tabulates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Putative tabulate-like corals dating to the Cambrian Explosion are not true tabulates. Early Ordovician fossils identified as Lichenaria and previously accepted as the earliest tabulate corals actually belong to Amsassia, which may be a calcareous alga. The earliest definite tabulates appeared in the latest Middle Ordovician as part of the Great Ordovician Biodiversification Event, prior to the earliest confirmed occurrence of tabulate species that do belong to Lichenaria in the Late Ordovician. With Cambrian (Epoch 2) tabulate-like fossils being separated from the appearance of true tabulates by a time span of ∼50 m.y., a direct phylogenetic connection is unlikely. Thus, the prevailing understanding of the origin and evolutionary history of tabulate corals needs to be reconsidered. The appearance of both major groups of Paleozoic corals, tabulates and rugosans, at the same time on separate paleocontinents must be taken into account in determining biological and geological factors involved in the Great Ordovician Biodiversification Event.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".