MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964259420 · doi:10.1029/2006jf000684

Neogene evolution of the mixed carbonate‐siliciclastic system in the Gulf of Papua, Papua New Guinea

2008· article· en· W1964259420 on OpenAlexaff
Evgueni N. Tcherepanov, André W. Droxler, Philippe Lapointe, Gerald R. Dickens, Samuel J. Bentley, Luc Beaufort, Larry C. Peterson, James Daniell, Bradley N. Opdyke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geophysical Studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSiliciclasticGeologyPaleontologyCarbonateCarbonate platformCenozoicSedimentary rockLate MioceneNeogeneTectonic subsidenceSedimentary depositional environmentPassive marginRiftTectonicsStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper outlines the evolution of the late Cenozoic mixed carbonate‐siliciclastic depositional system in the Gulf of Papua (GoP), using seismic, gravity, multibeam bathymetry, well data sets, and Landsat imagery. The deposition of the mixed sedimentary sequences was influenced by dynamic interplay of tectonics, eustasy, in situ carbonate production, and siliciclastic sediment supply. The roles of these major factors are estimated during different periods of the GoP margin evolution. The Cenozoic mixed system in the GoP formed in distinct phases. The first phase (Late Cretaceous–Paleocene) was mostly driven by tectonics. Rifting created grabens and uplifted structural blocks which served later as pedestals for carbonate edifices. Active neritic carbonate accumulation characterized the second phase (Eocene–middle Miocene). During this phase, mostly eustatic fluctuations controlled the large‐scale sedimentary geometries of the carbonate system. The third phase (late Miocene–early Pliocene) was characterized by extensive demise of the carbonate platforms in the central part of the study area, which can be triggered by one or combination of several factors, such as eustatic sea level fluctuations, increased tectonic subsidence, uplift, sudden influx of siliciclastics, or dramatic changes in environmental conditions and climate. The fourth phase (late Pliocene‐Holocene) was dominated by siliciclastics, which resulted in the burial of drowned and/or active carbonate platforms, although some platforms still remain alive until present‐day.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations53
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicGeological and Geophysical StudiesFrench-language works237,207