Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter is intended to facilitate an understanding of how foraminifera and thecamoebians can help in evaluating marine-related environmental questions. Many of the diagrams presented have been simplified from the original for demonstrative purposes. SEA-LEVEL CHANGES Definitive Assemblages Many workers have used foraminifera as sea-level indicators (see Haynes, 1981, for a review) but, prior to 1976, their resolution was limited to plus or minus several meters, especially if offshore assemblages were used. The assemblages described here should provide an accuracy of plus or minus a few centimeters at best, and 50 cm at worst. In 1976, the absolute accuracy of salt marsh foraminiferal vertical zonations was verified in southern California (Scott, 1976a) and later compared on a worldwide scale (Scott and Medioli, 1978, 1980b). Since that time, much more work has been done to verify that the relationship exists everywhere (e.g., Petrucci et al., 1983; Patterson, 1990; D. K. Scott and Leckie, 1990; Jennings and Nelson, 1992; Gehrels, 1994; deRijk, 1995; Horton et al., 1999a,b). It appears that the same eight to ten species of marsh foraminifera are ubiquitous throughout the world's salt marshes, especially in the upper half of the marsh. The reason salt marshes in general, and marsh foraminiferal zones in particular, have been used widely for sea-level studies is that the entire marsh environment is confined to the upper half of the tidal range (Chapman, 1960). For most tidal ranges this means that the whole vertical range of the salt marsh deposit is 1 meter or less.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.321 | 0.256 |
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".