{"id":"W2184708628","doi":"","title":"Sedimentary thickness from Receiver Function analysis - a simple approach. Case study from North Greenland.","year":2012,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"EGUGA","topic":"Geological Studies and Exploration","field":"Earth and Planetary Sciences","cited_by":2,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":true,"ca_institutions":"","funders":"","keywords":"Geology; Structural basin; Sedimentary rock; Sedimentary basin; Submarine pipeline; Proterozoic; Receiver function; Sedimentary basin analysis; Canada Basin; Sedimentary structures; Geomorphology; Seismology; Paleontology; Oceanography; Sedimentary depositional environment; Lithosphere; Tectonics","routes":{"ca_aff":false,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":true},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"codex-gemma-dda1882f352a","candidate_categories":["insufficient_payload"],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.0001814387,0.0001343443,0.0002222235,0.0000461619,0.0003229179,0.00003623654,0.00008237025,0.00005125039,0.005299926],"category_scores_gemma":[0.00001129135,0.00009332719,0.00007798558,0.0004228411,0.00002788541,0.0003158187,0.00002377588,0.000113607,0.0003365263],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.000005302513,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.00000409383,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.2548663,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.1007008,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9989195,0.000149916,0.0001789278,0.0002741872,0.0002211726,0.0002562563],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9994805,0.0001137503,0.0000689544,0.0001833449,0.00002349528,0.0001299949],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"observational","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.00004978873,0.0001169644,0.9867777,8.349145e-7,0.000450588,0.00004254975,0.001974966,0.001749605,4.2471e-7,3.375344e-7,0.001040959,0.00779534],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0002728108,0.0001298771,0.9853811,3.569411e-7,0.0005929476,0.000004241171,0.008873506,0.001835606,5.821305e-7,0.00008410409,0.00268805,0.0001368131],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":"observational","genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9974708,0.0004841119,0.0006558965,0.00004913173,0.0002651444,0.0001897524,0.0002233409,0.00004388386,0.0006179314],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9958104,0.00001448862,0.0003434994,0.000271355,0.0004560408,0.000005206399,0.003059872,0.000002043973,0.00003713085],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1541654,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.9956093,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.03748628749834407,"score_gpt":0.216938677968858,"score_spread":0.1794523904705139,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}