MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213022489 · doi:10.1017/jpa.2021.125

The soft-bodied biota of the Cambrian Series 2 Parker Quarry Lagerstätte of northwestern Vermont, USA

2022· article· en· W4213022489 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Giovanni Pari, Derek E. G. Briggs, Robert R. Gaines

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Paleontology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of WindsorYale UniversitySmithsonian Institution
KeywordsLagerstättePaleontologyLaurentiaBiotaTaxonGeologyArthropodStage (stratigraphy)TaphonomyGenusBiologyEcologyPaleozoic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A non-biomineralized arthropod, Protocaris marshi , was described from the lower Cambrian (Dyeran Series 2, Stage 4) of Parker's Cobble in northwestern Vermont in 1884. It represents the first fossil exhibiting Burgess Shale-type preservation to have been discovered. The locality was presumed to have been worked out and was not collected in a significant way for more than 100 years. Rediscovery of productive layers has yielded soft-bodied and lightly sclerotized taxa new to the locality, including the alga Fuxianospora , a possible priapulid, a radiodont, and a specimen tentatively assigned to Herpetogaster . New specimens of the sponge Leptomitus zitteli , the bivalved arthropod Tuzoia , and the chordate Emmonsaspis cambrensis provide additional information on those taxa, and multiple specimens allow a bivalved arthropod, Vermontcaris montcalmi new genus, new species, to be described. The primary mode of fossil preservation is as carbonaceous compressions. The Parker Quarry Lagerstätte complements the Kinzers Formation of Pennsylvania (also Series 2, Stage 4) in revealing the diversity of soft-bodied taxa on the southern margin of the paleocontinent Laurentia. UUID: http://zoobank.org/2eb3ae7c-6579-403e-a9ab-654c05af4a1b

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)0.001
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 score0.402
Threshold uncertainty score0.607

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PaleontologySame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207