Fig. 12 in Morphology and relationships of the enigmatic stenothecoid pan-brachiopod Stenothecoides-new data from the middle Cambrian Burgess Shale Formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fig. 12. Microstructure in the stenothecoid pan-brachiopod Stenothecoides spp. and co-occurring rhynchonelliformean brachiopods. A–C. Stenothecoides rasettii sp. nov., middle Cambrian, Burgess Shale Formation, Yoho National Park, Canada, Locality 1. A. TMP 2008.024.1142, fragmentary valve in interior view (A1), detail showing silica rods imbricated and inclined toward valve margin (A2). B. TMP 2008.024.1150, ventral valve in exterior view (B1), showing silica rods oriented with proximal ends of rods overlapping distal ends of preceding rods in posterior third of valve, but seemingly reversing orientation in posterior third of valve (B2). C. TMP 2008.024.1141 (same specimen and valve area as in Fig. 11C1, inner box) detail showing silica rods. D, E. Stenothecoides elongata (Walcott, 1884), Drumian Stage stratotype, Drum Mountains, western Utah (USA), Locality 8 (Robison 1964), external shell features. D. TMP 2021.022.0008, ventral(?) valve in exterior view (D1), detail of anterior end (D2), arrows show incompletely silicified radial rods. E. TMP 2021.022.0009, dorsal(?) valve, anterior end showing silicified outer shell surface with fine radial elements extending across growth varices (black arrows) and apparently shorter radial rods in valve sublayers (white arrows). F, G. Rhynchonelliformean brachiopods, silicified microstructure, Burgess Shale Formation, Canada, Locality 1. F. Tomteluva sp., TMP 2008.024.1151, silicified shell in exterior view (F1), posterior end is broken; anterior is to the right; detail showing orientation of silica rods (F2), anterior is to the left. G. Fragmentary nisusiid, TMP 2008.024.1152, silicified shell in interior view (G1), detail showing imbricated silica rods (G2). A, C, F, SEM images and B, D, E, G, light microscope images.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".