MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2791596593 · doi:10.4095/306490

Challenges in building a 3-D geologic model of the Paleozoic bedrock of southern Ontario

2018· report· en· W2791596593 sur OpenAlexaffabout
T Carter, F R Brunton, Jocalyn Clark, L Fortner, C Logan, H A J Russell, M.L. Somers, L Sutherland, K Yeung

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typereport
Langueen
DomaineEarth and Planetary Sciences
ThématiqueGeological Modeling and Analysis
Établissements canadiensNatural Resources Canada
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPaleozoicBedrockGeologyPaleontologyMining engineeringEarth science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

A regional 3-D geological model of the Paleozoic bedrock of southern Ontario is in its third year of development. The current version is in the early stages of review and is scheduled to be available as a public domain product in autumn 2018. The model encompasses all south-western and south-central Ontario, an area of 110,000 km2 and the complete Paleozoic sedimentary bedrock succession. This project is a collaboration of the Geological Survey of Canada, Ontario Geological Survey (OGS), Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) and the Oil, Gas and Salt Resources Library (Library). The model is constructed in Leapfrog© Hydro (Aranz Geo Limited) - an implicit modelling application. Layers representing 58 geological formations were constructed using formation depth data from 26,700 petroleum borehole records in the Ontario Petroleum Data System (OPDS), supplemented by hundreds of deep bedrock boreholes compiled by OGS. OPDS is an Oracle relational database built and maintained by the MNRF and the Library, representing borehole data collected over 150 years of petroleum drilling. Formation depth data in the borehole records comprise the primary data input for the 3-D model. Leapfrog also allows layers to be augmented by 3-D vector objects. For this model an OGS digital bedrock topography surface is combined with a revised 2-D subcrop geology map to assemble a grid of 3-D points that approximate the subcrop surface of each mapped formation. These, along with digitized 3-D surface polyline and point constraints are used to better align the modelled layers with expert knowledge and mapped geology. Model development is an iterative cycle of interim model construction, expert geological appraisal to identify errors/inconsistencies in both the model construction and borehole database, followed by editing of formation depth data using geophysical logs, drill cuttings and drill core and a revised lithostratigraphy. Errors in early models were dominated by incorrect borehole location coordinates, data entry errors, and missing and inconsistent formation contact picks, and were expressed as anomalies on modelled formation surfaces. Database integrity and model construction have improved to the point that the current model is approaching a geologically robust result. Issues that have been corrected or are in the process of being dealt with include: inaccurate thickness extrapolations beneath Lake Huron, to be remedied by addition of Michigan borehole data; gaps in continuity of thin formations caused by widely-spaced boreholes, to be remedied by addition of control points with inferred formation depths; obsolete stratigraphic terminology in the database has been corrected; lack of subdivision of the Lockport Group into its constituent formations has been corrected for 397 wells; extrapolations of modelled Silurian formations beyond their erosional limit at the Niagara Escarpment will likely require manual intervention due to functional limitations in the Leapfrog Hydro application; incorrect pinchout edges, caused by data gaps, remedied by addition of measured sections and OGS stratigraphic boreholes; scattered anomalous outliers for several formations may require manual intervention; inconsistent identification of Devonian sandstones, remedied by a separate project to characterize and map the sandstone units; inconsistent identification, correlation and integration of the Bois Blanc and Onondaga formations + unnamed sandstone units. The model is vetted by geologists with many years of experience working in southern Ontario. The model will provide an unprecedented regional perspective and digital framework to support resource exploration, hydrogeological/environmental investigation, education and informed decision-making related to resource management and land-use planning. The model lacks the level of detail needed for a small-scale site-specific investigation, but provides a regional context and may be adapted with the addition of detailed field mapping, new boreholes and structural data.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,583
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,139
Tête enseignante GPT0,258
Écart entre enseignants0,120 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2018
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même sujetGeological Modeling and AnalysisTravaux en français237 207