MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376877205 · doi:10.1017/jpa.2023.26

The unusual atrypide brachiopod <i>Qilianotryma suspectum</i> (Popov, 1982) from the Upper Ordovician of the South China paleoplate

2023· article· en· W4376877205 on OpenAlexafffund
Yuchen Zhang, Colin D. Sproat, Renbin Zhan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Paleontology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersChinese Academy of SciencesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsOrdovicianTerraneBalticaPaleontologyGeologyLaurentiaPalaeogeographyTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The atrypide brachiopod Qilianotryma Xu in Jin et al., 1979 is an early member of the subfamily Spirigerininae initially described from the Katian (Upper Ordovician) Koumenzi Formation of the Qilian Mountains, Qaidam terrane, Northwest China. Qilianotryma suspectum (Popov in Nikiforova et al., 1982) is described for the first time from the Upper Ordovician of South China paleoplate. Serial sectioning in this study revealed the typical spiralia and other internal structures of early atrypides. The rephotographing of type material and discriminant analysis support that Qilianotryma and broadly similar Euroatrypa can be differentiated in terms of external morphology. The distribution of Qilianotryma across the South China paleoplate, Qaidam terrane, and a few Kazakh terranes (i.e., Chu-Ili, Boshchekul, and Chingiz-Tarbagatai) supports a low-latitude faunal province separate from that of Laurentia and Baltica during the Katian, but further work describing and reviewing additional fossil material from these plates and terranes may improve our understanding of the position of these plates and the role that paleogeography played in increasing biodiversity during the Ordovician Radiation.

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 score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score0.735

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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