MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6893201668 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.14205942

Edmontosaurus Lambe 1917

2024· article· en· W6893201668 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSkullHolotypeDorsumGenusSynapomorphy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

CASE STUDY I: SKULL OF EDMONTOSAURUS Edmontosaurus is a relatively well-known genus of large hadrosaurid from the Upper Cretaceous of North America. One of the most striking synapomorphies of this genus is the presence of a large posterior excavation in the postorbital bone, termed the postorbital pocket, which is best developed in Edmontosaurus regalis (Campione & Evans 2011). E. regalis is a commonly occurring fossil in Alberta, known from numerous monodominant bonebeds (Evans et al. 2015). One of us (HS) recently described cranial material recovered from one such site, the Danek Bonebed in southwestern Edmonton, Canada (Bell & Campione 2014), for an undergraduate class project. Part of this description involved drawing anterior, lateral, and dorsal orthographic views of a skull reconstruction of E. regalis to show the life positions of different skull elements recovered from the Danek Bonebed (Fig. 4). These reconstructions were based on 3D scans of the mostly-disarticulated paratype specimen (CMN 2289), the only E. regalis skull for which 3D scans were available (Rybczynski et al. 2008). The scans of individual bones were assembled in Autodesk Maya 2018 to produce a 3D rendering of the nearly complete skull (Fig. 4A, B), using complete E. regalis skulls (CMN 2288, ROM 801) for guidance in articulating elements and correcting taphonomic distortion. Drawings (Fig. 4C, D) were made by tracing rendered images of this re-articulated skull in Adobe Photoshop 2022. It was quickly noticed upon illustrating the orbits in anterior view that the postorbital pockets were not only deeply concave posteriorly, but also protruded laterally (Fig. 4D). This caused the posterior margin of the orbit to be positioned much further laterally than the anterior margin, suggesting a large degree of binocular overlap in this species (Sharpe et al. work in progress). Re-examination of the 3D scans confirmed the first-order inference regarding the orientation of the orbits, and by extension the second-order inference regarding the presence of binocular overlap: the orbits of E. regalis are shifted laterally, and attempting to distort the postorbitals to minimise this feature resulted in a 3D skull that did not fit together, falsifying the alternative hypothesis that the posterior margins of the orbits were not especially laterally prominent. The simple act of illustrating a skull in anterior view permitted important new structural and functional inferences about a species described over a century ago (Lambe 1917).

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicPaleontology and Evolutionary Biology→French-language works237,207→