MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387132850 · doi:10.1144/jgs2023-106

The lower Cambrian Cranbrook Lagerstätte of British Columbia

2023· article· en· W4387132850 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jean‐Bernard Caron, Mark Webster, Derek E. G. Briggs, Giovanni Pari, Guy Santucci, M. Gabriela Mángano, Alejandro Izquierdo‐López, Michael Streng, Robert R. Gaines

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Geological Society · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanRoyal Ontario MuseumUniversity of Toronto
FundersRoyal Ontario Museum
KeywordsLagerstätteTaphonomyGeologyPaleontologyBiostratigraphyAssemblage (archaeology)Oil shaleBiotaArchaeologyGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Discovered over a century ago, the lower Cambrian (Series 2, Stage 4) Cranbrook Lagerstätte of southeastern British Columbia's Eager Formation is one of the oldest Burgess Shale-type deposits in North America. This Konservat-Lagerstätte is rich in olenelloid trilobites, but also yields a very low-diversity soft-bodied fossil assemblage including Tuzoia and Anomalocaris , and a low-diversity ichnofauna. Its scientific study, however, remains limited. A 2015 field-based investigation by the Royal Ontario Museum has revealed new information about the site's biota, depositional environment and taphonomic conditions. Not only is the Cranbrook Lagerstätte significant for early Cambrian biostratigraphy and comparisons with other Burgess Shale-type deposits, it also reveals some of the little-known diversity of life in a distal outer shelf environment during the Cambrian period. Supplementary material: Three supplementary figures (historical map, Tuzoia outlines, Anomalocaris specimens), supplementary material and methods, and a supplementary data file (generic presence/absence matrix) are available at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.6850810

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 score0.223
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Geological SocietySame topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207