MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Combined tide and wave influence on sedimentation patterns in the Upper Jurassic Swift Formation, south‐eastern Alberta

2001· article· en· W1566715150 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Marianne Molgat, R. W. C. Arnott

Bibliographic record

VenueSedimentology · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsGeologyMarine transgressionSiltstonePaleontologyUnconformityOil shaleDeposition (geology)Structural basinTransgressiveSedimentary depositional environmentGeomorphologyFacies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In south‐eastern Alberta, the Oxfordian Swift Formation comprises two unconformity‐bounded sequences. Sequence 1 consists of the shale member. It unconformably overlies Bathonian calcareous shale of the Rierdon Formation and consists dominantly of shale with uncommon hum‐ mocky cross‐stratified siltstone. The shale member comprises up to four parasequences that show a subtle upward‐fining stacking pattern, suggesting overall deepening in a storm‐dominated fully marine basin. Deposition of the shale member was terminated by a fall in relative sea‐level, which in turn initiated sequence 2. During lowstand, a network of north‐east‐ to south‐west‐trending meandering channels incised the top of sequence 1. Despite the preserved morphology of these channels, observations in core suggest that lowstand deposits are absent. These strata were most likely thoroughly reworked by ravinement processes associated with the ensuing transgression and are recorded only by a thin chert pebble lag. Also associated with transgression were significant changes in the physical and ecological conditions in the local Swift basin. These changes were related to modifications in basin configuration and the development of a low‐energy strait, which probably formed as a result of uplift of the Sweetgrass Arch. Within this newly configured basin, brackish‐water conditions prevailed, and sedimentation was dominated by suspension deposition of mud. Bed‐load sediment, composed mostly of very fine and fine sand, made up only a small part of the total sediment flux into the area and was transported principally by low‐energy combined flows with variable‐speed microtidal currents and a low‐energy oscillatory component related to storm waves. Sand was generally deposited in the form of small, discontinuous sand ridges that developed locally throughout the study area – it is these features that form the principal hydrocarbon reservoir bodies in the Swift Formation in the study area. After initiation, ridges built upwards and migrated laterally in response to transport and preferential local deposition of bed‐load sediment. Although common near the unconformity along the top of sequence 1, sand ridges also occur at several higher stratigraphic levels in sequence 2. These latter ridges, however, are not associated with regionally correlatable discontinuities but, instead, were initiated by local bed irregularities, possibly related to breaking internal waves, and were supplied with new sediment transported into the study area. The origin of these sand ridges is therefore not related to changes in relative sea‐level but, instead, to intrabasinal processes in a low‐energy strait.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.817

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations17
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSedimentologySame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207