MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6912550717 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.3848332

Hoplostethus Cuvier 1829

2017· article· en· W6912550717 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Formations and Processes Exploration
Canadian institutionsBC Research (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtant taxonOtolithFish <Actinopterygii>Genus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genus Hoplostethus Cuvier, 1829 Description A large, adult otolith (Fig. 10F) of Hoplostethus lawleyi Koken, 1891 is easily distinguished from the Miocene Hoplostethus praemediterraneus Schubert, 1905 (Fig. 10 A–E) by its very depressed anterodorsal area. This feature also characterises large-sized otoliths of the extant Hoplostethus mediterraneus Cuvier, 1829, but otoliths of H. lawleyi are different from those of H. mediterraneus in having a wider sulcus, a strongly developed ostial colliculum and a narrower ventral area. The distinction between H. mediterraneus and H. praemediterraneus can be made with the help of the growth series of H. praemediterraneus from the Badenian of the Carpathian Foredeep (Brzobohatý 1978: pl. 1, figs 1–16, as Hoplostethus levis biexcissus and H. l. levis) and of our material (Fig. 10 A–E), which clearly demonstrate that the otoliths of H. praemediterraneus are, at each stage, higher and more compact in shape than those of H. mediterraneus (see Nolf 2013: pl. 165).

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.021

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.184 · 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