FIG. 7 in Skeletal reconstruction of fossil vertebrates as a process of hypothesis testing and a source of anatomical and palaeobiological inferences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
FIG. 7. — Reconstructed articular configuration of distal part of left hindlimb of an indeterminate ceratopsid dinosaur (UALVP 42): A, perspective view of entire reconstructed crus and pes standing on scaled ceratopsid footprint. Opaque areas represent original bone material, while transparent ones represent plaster. Phalanx I-1 from UALVP 16248, an associated Centrosaurus apertus (Lambe, 1905) skeleton from Dinosaur Provincial Park, with missing anteromedial corner of proximal end restored in Pixologic ZBrush but shown as transparent. Footprint adapted from Gierlinski & Sabath (2008: fig. 10F). B-E, two postulated articular configurations of the crus and proximal tarsals in distal (B, D) and anterior (C, E) orthographic views; B, C, astragalus, outer tibial condyle, and calcaneum aligned roughly along a mediolateral line; white arrow points to large gap between astragalus and outer tibial condyle; D, E, astragalus angled in order to eliminate the gap, with the medial side farther anterior than the lateral side, and the calcaneum placed anteriorly. Abbreviations: as, astragalus; c, calcaneum; fib, fibula; otc, outer tibial condyle; tib, tibia. Scale bars: A, 20 cm; B-E, 10 cm.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".