MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995834340 · doi:10.1130/g30443.1

Paleozoic vegetation and the Siluro-Devonian rise of fluvial lateral accretion sets

2010· article· en· W1995834340 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Neil S. Davies, Martin R. Gibling

Bibliographic record

VenueGeology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNova scotiaCitationDevonianLibrary scienceGeologyPaleozoicVegetation (pathology)FluvialAccretion (finance)ArchaeologyPaleontologyHistoryComputer sciencePhysicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A long-standing hypothesis links the increased prominence of meandering rivers in the \nmiddle Paleozoic to the colonization of terrestrial environments by vegetation. This hypoth- \nesis is tested using a data set of Cambrian to Devonian fl uvial literature and fi eld examina- \ntion of key stratigraphic units. According to some researchers, Cambrian to mid-Silurian \nriver systems were braided in planform, with a sharp increase in the abundance of mean- \ndering rivers during the Silurian–Devonian. Although meandering systems were largely \nidentifi ed on the basis of thick mudstones and organized channel deposits, the data set \nrecord of lateral accretion sets appears to be a robust proxy for the abundance of meander- \ning river point bars. Lateral accretion is fi rst recorded from Pridolian–Lochkovian strata, \nbut is noted in nearly 40% of fl uvial case studies by the Famennian. This trend matches the \nknown record of rooted vegetation, suggesting that vegetation progressively stabilized river \nbanks and promoted single-thread channels. However, the presence of Precambrian and \nextraterrestrial meandering systems indicates that vegetation is not essential for meander- \ning, and the lack of evidence for Cambrian to Silurian (Ludlow) point bars is surprising. If \noriginally present, they may largely have been destroyed by extreme fl oods, chute cut-offs in \ncoarse-grained meandering systems, and eolian activity.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations124
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeologySame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207