MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406870057 · doi:10.1144/jgs2024-242

Architectural modelling of the fractal-like Ediacaran rangeomorph C <i>harnia masoni</i>

2025· article· en· W4406870057 on OpenAlexafffund
Duncan McIlroy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Geological Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchaeological and Geological Studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeologyFractalPaleontologyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The frondose Rangeomorpha are a poorly understood group of Ediacaran fractal-like organisms with a body plan that is unknown among modern organisms. The first described rangeomorph Charnia masoni is one of the most iconic members of the Ediacaran biotas, first described from Charnwood Forest in Leicestershire. The complex branching of the Rangeomorpha in three dimensions is a challenge to understand, and previous work by the late Martin Brasier sought to explain architectural concepts with simplified diagrams. The present work builds on that earlier work using 3D sculpting to reconstruct the fractal-like branching, while also honouring the shapes seen in the type material of Charnia masoni . The resulting forms are surprisingly complex and have enormous surface areas. If the surfaces of Charnia as reconstructed were covered with simple choanocytes, it could be considered as a potentially highly effective full-body suspension-feeding metazoan organism.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Geological SocietySame topicArchaeological and Geological StudiesFrench-language works237,207