MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4234777227 · doi:10.31233/osf.io/ydvra

The Morrison Formation Sauropod Consensus: A freely accessible online spreadsheet of collected sauropod specimens, their housing institutions, contents, references, localities, and other potentially useful information

2019· article· en· W4234777227 on OpenAlexaff
Emanuel Tschopp, John A. Whitlock, D. Cary Woodruff, John R. Foster, Roberto Lei, Simone Giovanardi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario MuseumUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstitutionArchaeologyGeographyComputer scienceLibrary scienceWorld Wide WebSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Morrison Formation has been explored for dinosaurs for more than 150 years, often specifically for largesauropod skeletons curators wanted to mount as attractions in their museum exhibits around the world. Severallong-term campaigns to the Jurassic West of the United States produced hundreds of specimens, ranging fromisolated, fragmentary bones to nearly complete skeletons of these enormous herbivorous animals. Given thesheer number of specimens, keeping track of what is housed in which institution is paramount to study variability,taxonomy, and consequently geographic and temporal distribution of the various species and genera recognizedfrom the Morrison Formation. In an attempt to facilitate these studies, we have compiled an online spreadsheetintended to combine all the available information on sauropod specimens from collection databases, publishedliterature, and personal observations. These include lists of contents of the specimens, in what institution thematerial is housed, references mentioning, describing, figuring, providing measurements and/or 3D scans, localitydata and stratigraphy, as well as other potentially useful data for research purposes. The spreadsheet is openlyaccessible, but editing is currently restricted to the authors of this study, in order to ensure high-quality datacuration to keep the file as useful as possible.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score0.679

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0140.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2030.102

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology→French-language works237,207→