Constraining the body mass range of Anzu wyliei using volumetric and extant-scaling methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to accurately and reliably estimate body mass of extinct taxa is a vital tool for interpreting the physiology and even behavior of long-dead animals. For this reason, paleontologists have developed many possible methods of estimating the body mass of extinct animals, with varying degrees of success. These methods can be divided into two main categories: volumetric mass estimation and extant scaling methods. Each has advantages and disadvantages, which is why, when possible, it is best to perform both, and compare the results to determine what is most plausible within reason. Here we employ volumetric mass estimation (VME) to calculate an approximate body mass for previously described specimens of Anzu wyliei from the Carnegie Museum of Natural History. We also use extant scaling methods to try to obtain a reliable mass estimate for this taxon. In addition, we present the first digital life restoration and convex hull of the dinosaur Anzu wyliei used for mass estimation purposes. We found that the volumetric mass estimation using our digital model was 216-280kg, which falls within the range predicted by extant scaling techniques, while the mass estimate using minimum convex hulls was below the predicted range, between 159-199 kg . The VME method for Anzu wyliei strongly affirms the predictive utility of extant-based scaling. However, volumetric mass estimates are likely more precise because the models are based on comprehensive specimen anatomy rather than regressions of a phylogenetically comprehensive but disparate sample.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".