Intra-basaltic soil formation, sedimentary reworking and eodiagenetic K-enrichment in the Middle to Upper Ordovician Dunn Point Formation of eastern Canada: a rare window into early Palaeozoic surface and near-surface conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Mafic flows of the Middle to Upper Ordovician Dunn Point Formation of eastern Canada were deeply weathered under warm and relatively humid conditions before being buried by subsequent flows. In the absence of superior plants, and in the context of relatively low atmospheric carbon levels, the soils developed alkaline groundwater conditions through mineral–water interactions, which resulted in an enhanced mobility of Al relative to Si in most palaeosols of that formation. Although the vegetation cover was volumetrically insignificant compared with that of subsequent geological times, it was apparently producing very efficient chelates, which, for most palaeosols of the succession, generated a well-defined cheluviation pattern for not only Al and Fe, but also and mainly Ti, which is typically immobile in modern soils. The resulting soils developed an Al–Fe–Ti-depleted upper horizon that was enriched in Si, probably through periodic ground saturation. Long-term climatic variations related to orbital cycles are inferred to have accounted for a second type of soil in the succession, which contrasts with the former by showing a Si-depleted and less Al–Fe–Ti-depleted upper horizon. Some soil material was substantially reworked by surface runoff, but such occurrences can be easily differentiated fromin situsoil material in terms of texture, structure and composition. A thick overlying rhyolite flow is thought to be responsible for providing abundant K in solution, which was incorporated in the underlying basalt palaeosols as exchangeable cations within a probably montmorillonitic clay precursor to the Fe–Mg-rich phengite that later developed during deep burial and orogenic compression.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".