A potential deinocheirid ornithomimosaur from the Judith River Formation (Upper Cretaceous: Montana, U.S.A.) and its paleobiogeographic implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Here, we describe a potential deinocheirid ornithomimosaur from the Upper Cretaceous Judith River Formation of Montana, represented by isolated left and right dentaries. Compared with ornithomimids, the dentaries exhibit distinct morphological features, including a dorsoventrally tall dentary, absence of the dorsal ridge on the cutting edge, and lack of significant symphyseal expansion. These features resemble those observed in deinocheirid ornithomimosaurs, particularly Deinocheirus mirificus, although the fragmentary nature of the new material hinders definitive taxonomic attributions. Computed tomographic imaging reveals the presence of three major neurovascular canals that likely supplied vessels and nerves to the rhamphotheca. These canals communicate with the vascular impressions on the medial surface of the dentary. The vascular impressions indicate blood vessels running within the dermis, indicating an avian-like rhamphotheca nourishing system in Ornithomimosauria. Regardless of its taxonomic status, the dorsoventrally deep dentary differs from known ornithomimosaurs in North America. This finding, therefore, underscores the hidden dinosaur diversity yet to be unveiled, even within well-studied dinosaur-bearing rock units that contribute to our understanding of the paleobiogeography and evolutionary history of ornithomimosaur dinosaurs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".