Heterodontus Version 2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Berg, L.S. 1937. A classification of fish-like vertebrates. Bulletin de l’Académie des Sciences de l’URSS 4: 1277–1280. [In Russian]. Blainville, H.M.D. de. 1816. Prodrome d’une nouvelle distribution systématique du règne animal. Bulletin des Sciences, par la Société Philomatique de Paris 8:105–124. Bonaparte, C.L. 1838. Selachorum tabula analytica. Nuovi Annali della Science Naturali Bologna 1(2):195–214. Cappetta, H. 2012. Chondrichthyes Mesozoic and Cenozoic Elasmobranchii: Teeth. Pages 1–512. In: H.-P. Schultze (editor). Handbook of Paleoichthyology, Volume 3E. Gustav Fischer Verlag, Münchin. Cappetta H. & D. Nolf. 1981. Les sélaciens du Pliocène inférieur de Le-Puget-sur-Argens (Sud-Est de la France). Palaeontographica Abteilung A 218(1–3):49–67. Case, G.R. 1994. Fossil fish remains from the Late Paleocene Tuscahoma and Early Eocene Bashi formations of Meridian, Lauderdale County, Mississippi. Part 1, Selachians. Palaeontographica Abteilung A Band A230 Lieferung 4(6):139–153. Case, G.R., T.D. Cook & M.V.H. Wilson. 2015. A new elasmobranch assemblage from the early Eocene (Ypresian) Fishburne Formation of Berkeley County, South Carolina, USA. Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences 52(12):1121–1136. https://doi.org/10.1139/cjes-2015-0061 Casier, E. 1943. Contributions à l’étude des poissons fossils de la Belgique. III. Quelques espèces nouvelles ou peu connues du Landénien marin. Bulletin du Musée Royal d’Histoire Naturelle de Belgique 19(35):1–16. Casier, E. 1946. La faune ichthyologique de l’Yprésien de la Belgique. Mémoires du Musée Royal d’Histoire Naturelle de Belgique 104:1–267. Casier, E. 1966. Faune ichthyologique du London Clay. Trustees of the British Museum, London. 496 pages. Cope, E.D. 1871. Observations on the systematic relations of the fishes. The American Naturalist 5:579–593. Ebersole, J.A., D.J. Cicimurri & G.L. Stringer. 2019. Taxonomy and biostratigraphy of the elasmobranchs and bony fishes (Chondrichthyes and Osteichthyes) of the lower-to-middle Eocene (Ypresian to Bartonian) Claiborne Group in Alabama, USA, including an analysis of otoliths. European Journal of Taxonomy 585:1–274. https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2019.585 Gray, J.E. 1831. Description of three new species of fish, including two undescribed genera, discovered by John Reeves, Esq., in China. Zoological Miscellany 1(6):4–5. Gray, J.E. 1851. List of the specimens of fish in the collection of the British Museum. Part I. Chondropterygii. British Museum, London. 160 pages. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.20819 Hay, O.P. 1902. Bibliography and catalogue of the fossil vertebrata of North America. Bulletin of the United States Geological Survey 179:1–868. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.20094 Huxley, T.H. 1880. On the application of the laws of evolution to the arrangement of the Vertebrata, and more particularly of the Mammalia. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London 1880:649–662. Leriche, M. 1905. Les poissons éocènes de la Belgique. Mémoires du Musée Royal d’Histoire Naturelle de Belgique 3(11):49–228. Meyer, F.A.A. 1793. Systematisch-summarische Uebersicht der neuesten zoologischen Entdeckungen in Neuholland und Afrika. Dykische Buchhandlung, Leipzig. 178 pages. https://doi.org/10.5962/bhl.title.39685 Nelson, J.S., T.C. Grande & M.V.H. Wilson. 2016. Fishes of the World, 5th edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York. 707 pages. Rosenkrantz, A. 1920. En ny københavnsk Lokalitet for forsteningsførende Paleocaen. Meddelelser fra Dansk Geologisk Forening 5(20):1–10. Thurmond, J.T. & D.E. Jones. 1981. Fossil vertebrates of Alabama. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa. 244 pages. White, E.I. 1956. The Eocene fishes of Alabama. Bulletins of American Paleontology 36(156):123–150. Woodward, A.S. 1891. Notes on some fish remains from the Lower Tertiary and Upper Cretaceous of Belgium: collected by Monsieur A. Houzeau de Lehaie. Geological Magazine 11891:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0016756800186224
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".