Sedimentology, ichnology and hydrodynamics of strait‐margin, sand and gravel beaches and shorefaces: Juan de Fuca Strait, British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract On the south‐west coast of Vancouver Island, Canada, sedimentological and ichnological analysis of three beach–shoreface complexes developed along a strait margin was undertaken to quantify process–response relations in straits and to develop a model for strait‐margin beaches. For all three beaches, evidence of tidal processes are expressed best in the lower shoreface and offshore and, to a lesser extent, in the middle shoreface. Tidal currents are dominant offshore, below 18 m water depth (relative to the mean spring high tide), whereas wave processes dominate sediment deposition in the nearshore (intertidal zone to 5 m water depth). From 18 to 5 m water depth, tidal processes decrease in importance relative to wave processes. The relatively high tidal energy in the offshore and lower shoreface is manifest sedimentologically by the dominance of sand, of a similar grain size to the upper shoreface/intertidal zone and, by the prevalence of current‐generated structures (current ripples) oriented parallel to the shoreline. In addition, the offshore and lower shoreface of strait‐bound beach–shoreface complexes are recognized ichnologically by traces typical of the Skolithos Ichnofacies. This situation contrasts to the dominantly horizontal feeding traces characteristic of the Cruziana Ichnofacies that are prevalent in the lower shoreface and offshore of open‐coast (wave‐dominated) beach–shorefaces. These sedimentological and ichnological characteristics reflect tidal influence on sediment deposition; consequently, the term ‘tide‐influenced shoreface’ most accurately describes these depositional environments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".