AMERICAN MUSEUM NOVITATES Published byNumber 988 THE AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY May 16, 1938New York City' UPPER MIOCENE MOLLUSCA FROM SPRINGVALE, TRINI- DAD, BRITISH WEST INDIES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The importance of the upper Miocene- fauna occurring at Springvale, Trinidad, British West Indies, has been recognized since the locality waa fst reported in 1910 but, although it has received attention in reports dealing with the general problem of the Miocene faunas of the Island, it has not been the subject of any detailed study. A collection of fossils from the Tertiary deposits of Trinidad recently received by the Department of Geology and Invertebrate Palaeontology of The American Museum of Natural History from Mr. Carlos H. Jooss of Georgetown, British Guiana, contains a representative suite of mollusca from this locality which has furnished the basis for the pres-ent study. The Springvale fauna is known from a quarry in west central Trini-dad, which is "situated on the side of a low hill, one of the lateral spurs of the Montserrat range " (Guppy, 1911, p. 195) in "Caroni County, Couva Ward, at Springvale, on Mount Pleasant Road and three-fourths to one mile south of Milton " (Mansfield, 1925, p. 7). Maury (1925, p. 162) has reported deposits of Springvale age from other localities on the Island but in the type region it is definitely known only from the one quarry. The strata %re covered by recent deposits and their extent is not certainly known. The discovery of the Springvale locality was reported in 1910 by R. J. Lechmere Guppy in a paper 'On a collection of fossils from Spring-vale, near Couva, Trinidad ' presented before the Agriculture Society of Trinidad and Tobago, and published as Society paper No. 440. Ap-pended was a 'List of the Miocene Molluska of Trinidad, 1910 ' in which 31 species of mollusca, 1 barnacle and 1 echinoderm were indicated as occurring here. In the following year a report, 'Fossils from Springvale
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.776 | 0.698 |
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".