MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231717778 · doi:10.1017/s0022336000042013

Small theropod and bird teeth from the late Cretaceous (late Campanian) Judith River Group, Alberta

2002· article· en· W4231717778 on OpenAlexaffabout
Julia Sankey, Donald B. Brinkman, Merrilee F. Guenther, Philip J. Currie

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Paleontology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsRoyal Tyrrell Museum
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAssemblage (archaeology)TaxonCretaceousGenusBiologyPaleontologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A collection of over 1,700 small theropod teeth from the Judith River Group (Campanian;˜79.5–74 Ma) allows our understanding of the diversity and variation of small theropods in this assemblage to be refined. In addition to the previously recognized taxa, a series of morphologically distinct groups are recognized that may represent distinct taxa in some cases. Teeth with the Paronychodon -like features of a flat surface with longitudinal ridges on one side are resolved into a few discrete morphotypes. Two of these are included in Paronychodon lacustris and two additional morphotypes are hypothesized to represent distinct taxa, here referred to as ? Dromaeosaurus morphotype A and Genus and species indet. A. The teeth of Paronychodon lacustris and ? Dromaeosaurus morphotype A share a distinctive wear pattern that suggests tooth functioning involved contact between the flat surfaces of opposing teeth. Two species of Richardoestesia, R. gilmorei and R. isosceles, are present in the assemblage. Additionally, bird teeth are identified in the assemblage and are described in this review. Bivariate plots were used to document the variation in the theropod teeth, especially in the features that distinguish between Richardoestesia gilmorei, R. isosceles, Saurornitholestes, and Dromaeosaurus. Considerable overlap is present in all plots, so although the teeth are morphologically distinct, they are not easily distinguished by quantitative means.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.562
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.173 · 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.

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

Citations30
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PaleontologySame topicPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyFrench-language works237,207