MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012405885 · doi:10.1029/2006gl027981

Geological and oceanographic perspectives on event bed formation during Hurricane Katrina

2006· article· en· W2012405885 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy R. Keen, Yusuke Furukawa, Samuel J. Bentley, Rudy Slingerland, William J. Teague, James D. Dykes, Clark Rowley

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones Research
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStormShoreGeologyLandfallTropical cycloneDeposition (geology)OceanographyMarine transgressionHurricane katrinaStorm surgeAtlantic hurricaneOverwashGeomorphologyBarrier islandSedimentNatural disasterStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Storm deposits in ancient shelf sediments typically form thick sequences of interbedded sand and mud deposited during shoreline regression, whereas modern shelf sediments are generally thin veneers deposited during shoreline transgression. In this paper we present a preliminary comparison between ancient and modern storm beds deposited in these disparate contexts. Hurricane Katrina deposited a storm bed on the Louisiana shelf with a maximum observed thickness of 0.58 m, which thinned to approximately 0.1 m at 200 km west of landfall. This thickness is similar to event beds observed in both ancient and modern sediments. Using data for tropical cyclone landfalls in the Gulf of Mexico, we estimate the return time for a storm of this size to be 40–50 years in this region. This estimated frequency for deposition of storm beds is useful in evaluating ancient storm sequences that were deposited during similar climatic conditions.

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 score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.640

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations34
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones ResearchFrench-language works237,207