IS THERE A VIABLE PETROLEUM SYSTEM IN THE CARSON AND SALAR BASINS, OFFSHORE NEWFOUNDLAND?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Carson Basin on the eastern Grand Banks of Newfoundland has been penetrated by four wells ‐ Bonnition H‐32, Osprey H‐84, Skua E‐41 and St. George J‐55 ‐ which were drilled along its western margin. The adjacent deeper‐water Salar Basin to the east remains undrilled with the exception of ODP holes 1276A and 1277. The Carson Basin wells contain a thick Mesozoic and Cenozoic sedimentary section which includes reservoirs and seals; but source rocks, such as those present in the adjacent Jeanne d'Arc Basin, have not been found. To assess the petroleum system, well samples were collected to provide Rock Eval and vitrinite reflectance data, and analysed biostratigraphically to obtain ages and depositional environments. These analyses indicate that a Late Jurassic source rock, similar to the Egret Member (of the Rankin Formation) of the Jeanne d'Arc Basin, may be present in the deeper‐water, distal parts of the Carson and Salar Basins; this is based on a regional palaeotectonic reconstruction, together with gravity and magnetic data, including sea‐floor spreading magnetic anomalies. We interpret the absence of the Egret Member in the four wells to reflect the wells' locations rather than the Member's absence from the two basins. An integrated 4D model of the Carson Basin was built from biostratigraphy and seismic surfaces, to which an Egret‐like source rock was added. The modelling showed that significant volumes of hydrocarbons could have been generated, mostly during the main Late Cretaceous drifting event in the area. Hence, significant volumes of hydrocarbons could be present in the Carson and Salar Basins, mainly in stratigraphic traps in Early Cretaceous clastic reservoirs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".