MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1528345943

Universal Sandstone Well Cuttings Comparator Set

2001· article· en· W1528345943 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Doug Hayden, Raymond Strom, J. S. Pennington

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSiliciclasticGeologyVariety (cybernetics)Sedimentary rockCuttingStructural basinPaleontologySedimentary basinEarth scienceComputer scienceSedimentary depositional environmentArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadian Geologists will have another tool available to facilitate the accurate description of siliciclastic cuttings samples. In conjunction with Continental Rocktell Services, Doug Hayden of Hayden Geological Consulting is producing a Rock Cuttings Comparator Set, which can be applied to a wide variety of siliciclastic reservoirs in the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin (W.C.S.B.) and formations world-wide.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0910.018

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological Studies and Exploration→French-language works237,207→