MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1015092191 · doi:10.3133/ofr03330

North Alaska petroleum system analysis: The regional map compilation

2003· article· en· W1015092191 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Richard W. Saltus, Kenneth J. Bird

Bibliographic record

VenueAntarctica A Keystone in a Changing World · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyBathymetryStructural basinRange (aeronautics)Geologic mapGeological surveyPaleontologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The U.S. Geological Survey initiated an effort to model north Alaskan petroleum systems. The geographic and geologic basis for modeling systems is provided by a set of regional digital maps that allow evaluation of the widest possible extent of each system. Accordingly, we laid out a rectangular map grid 1300 km (800 miles) east-west and 600 km (375 miles) north-south. The resulting map area extends from the Yukon Territory of Canada on the east to the Russian-U.S. Chukchi Sea on the west and from the Brooks Range on the south to the Canada basin-Chukchi borderland on the north. Within this map region, we combined disparate types of publicly available data to produce structure contour maps. Data types range from seismic-based mapping as in the National Petroleum Reserve to well penetrations in areas of little or no seismic data where extrapolation was required. With these types of data, we produced structure contour maps on three horizons: top of pre-Mississippian (basement), top of Triassic (Ellesmerian sequence), and top of Neocomian (Beaufortian sequence). These horizons, when combined with present-day topography and bathymetry, provide the bounding structural/stratigraphic surfaces of the north Alaskan petroleum province that mark major defining moments of the region's geologic history and allow regional portrayal of preserved sediment accumulations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.189 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAntarctica A Keystone in a Changing WorldSame topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207