Petrography and Significance of Zoned Dolomite Cements from the Cayman Formation (Miocene) of Cayman Brac, British West Indies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cavities in dolostones from the Cayman Formation (Miocene) from Cayman Brac commonly contain complex cement successions that record three main phases of diagenesis. Phase I cements, formed of low-Ca calcian dolomite (LCD) and high-Ca calcian dolomite (HCD), are divided into monomineralic LCD crystals, oscillatory-zoned LCD-HCD crystals, and step-zoned HCD-LCD crystals. Dissolution during phase II produced dolomite crystals with hollow cores, hollow growth zones, and hollow crosscutting zones. Calcite precipitated during phase III filled many of the cavities that had not been filled by the dolomite cements. Etching shows that the LCD is formed of "blocky" subcrystals that have their long axes perpendicular to the growth surfaces whereas HCD is characterized by a modulated structure that is evident as growth-parallel, slightly sinuous strands, 10-20 nm wide. The contrast in crystallographic microstructures supports the notion that LCD and HCD are distinct types of dolomite. Two levels of variability that operated on different time scales controlled diagenesis in the Cayman Formation of Cayman Brac. Long-term variability controlled the evolution from dolomite precipitation to dolomite dissolution to calcite precipitation. Short-term variability controlled variations in the physiochemical environments that characterized each phase of diagenesis. Thus, during Phase I diagenesis, short-term fluctuations in water chemistry and/or crystal growth patterns controlled the mol % CaCO3 in the dolomite cement crystals. Similarly, short-term variations in pore-water compositions controlled the style of dolomite dissolution during the second phase of diagenesis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".