MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300754843 · doi:10.55468/gc365

Collecting invertebrate trace fossils

2006· article· en· W4300754843 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeological Curator · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity College DublinNational Geographic Society
KeywordsTrace fossilGeologyPaleontologySedimentary rockIchnologyTRACE (psycholinguistics)InvertebrateProvenanceNatural (archaeology)Clastic rockArchaeologyEcologyBiologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trace fossils result from the behavioural activities between organisms and variable substrates. They form an integral part of the collections of many natural history museums, providing exciting specimens for display and important material for scientific research. Ichnofossils preserved parallel to stratification in sedimentary rocks can be collected in large slabs either from float or liberated by hammering or rock saw. Laterally extensive specimens commonly have a repetitive morphology, so a fragment may provide ample data for identification and description. The morphology of an ichnofossil that cross-cuts stratification will be more difficult to recognise in the field and may require laboratory preparation of slabs using a rock saw. Bioerosive structures in or on litho- or bioclasts may be easy to collect, but care must be taken to collect data relating to provenance, that is, whether the clasts are autochthonous or allochthonous.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.196 · 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