MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395482096 · doi:10.18435/vamp29395

Computed tomographic investigation of a hatchling skull reveals ontogenetic changes in the dentition and occlusal surface morphology of Hadrosauridae (Dinosauria: Ornithischia)

2024· article· en· W4395482096 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Trystan Warnock-Juteau, Michael J. Ryan, Tim Patterson, Jordan C. Mallon

Bibliographic record

VenueVertebrate Anatomy Morphology Palaeontology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsCanadian Museum of NatureCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkullJuvenileDentitionAnatomyBiologyDorsumPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CMN 8917 is a small, partial skull of a duck-billed dinosaur from the upper Campanian DinosaurPark Formation in what is now Dinosaur Provincial Park, Alberta. It represents one of the few nestling-sized juvenile hadrosaurines known to date. Support for this phylogenetic placement includes a narial vestibule not enclosed within the premaxillary dorsal and lateral processes, the presence of an anterodorsal maxillary process, and a maxillary dorsal process that is longer anteroposteriorly than dorsoventrally. The skull also possesses tooth traits traditionally associated with lambeosaurines, such as secondary ridges on some maxillary and dentary tooth crowns, and denticulation on some maxillary tooth crowns. The occurrence of these features in a juvenile hadrosaurine suggests that they were modified during ontogeny, calling into question their taxonomic utility for identifying juvenile specimens. The dentary teeth of CMN 8917 are similar to those of many adult hadrosaurids in that they possess a concave occlusal surface with steeper lingual and shallower buccal wear zones. This differs from the occlusal surface morphology present in some other juvenile hadrosaurids, which suggests interspecific differences in dental battery development—possibly reflective of dietary differences—occurred during early ontogeny in some taxa.

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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

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 studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVertebrate Anatomy Morphology PalaeontologySame topicPaleontology and Evolutionary BiologyFrench-language works237,207