MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394847651 · doi:10.1080/02724634.2024.2326644

Craniomandibular anatomy of a juvenile specimen of <i>Edmontosaurus regalis</i> Lambe, 1917 clarifies issues in ontogeny and biogeography

2023· article· en· W4394847651 on OpenAlexaffabout
Henry S. Sharpe, Mark J. Powers, Aaron D. Dyer, Matthew M. Rhodes, Annie P. McIntosh, Christiana Garros, Philip J. Currie, Gregory F. Funston

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vertebrate Paleontology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario MuseumUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOntogenyAnatomyJuvenileSquamataBiologyZoologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Edmontosaurus regalis is a hadrosaurid represented by abundant fossil material from the late Campanian–early Maastrichtian of what is now Alberta, Canada. Despite its prevalence, juvenile craniomandibular elements of E. regalis are poorly known. A newly collected partial skeleton from the Horseshoe Canyon Formation, UALVP 60425, represents a small saurolophine with a partial skull (skull length ∼500 mm). It can be referred to Edmontosaurini based on the presence of a postorbital fossa and anteroposteriorly long frontals that lack a dorsally oriented nasal contact and contribute significantly to the orbital margin. Despite its small size and presumed immaturity, UALVP 60425 is assigned to E. regalis based on a horizontal shelf on the postorbital process of the jugal. The deep postorbital fossa that, in part, diagnoses E. regalis is acquired during growth. UALVP 60425 shares many features with the Alaskan Prince Creek saurolophine (Ugrunaaluk kuukpikensis); both show consistent anatomical differences in the lacrimal, jugal, and postorbitals from E. annectens throughout their growth series. New data from UALVP 6025 supports referring the Alaskan saurolophine material to Edmontosaurus cf. regalis in the absence of large-sized cranial material from the Prince Creek Formation.

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 score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.932

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.249
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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