Role of the bedrock topography in the Quaternary filling of a giant estuarine basin: the Lower St. Lawrence Estuary, Eastern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The geometry of estuarine and/or incised‐valley basins and their protected character compared with open sea basins are favourable for the preservation of sedimentary successions. The Lower St. Lawrence Estuary Basin (LSLEB, eastern Canada) is characterized by a thick (>400 m in certain areas) Quaternary succession. High‐ and very high‐resolution seismic reflection data, multibeam bathymetry coverage completed by core and chronostratigraphic data as well as a 3‐D seismic stratigraphic model are used to document the geometrical relationships between the bedrock and the Quaternary units of the LSLEB. The bedrock geometry of LSLEB is characterized by two large troughs that are interpreted as resulting mainly from repeated (?) periods of glacial overdeepening of a pre‐Quaternary drainage system. However, other mechanisms with complex feedback effects such as differential glacio‐isostatic uplift, erosion, sedimentary supply, and subsidence may have contributed to the formation of bedrock troughs. The two large bedrock troughs are mostly filled by ∼200 m thick Wisconsinan (Marine Isotopic Stages 2–4) and possibly older sediments. Overlying units recorded the retreat of the Laurentian Ice Sheet during the Late Wisconsinan (Marine Isotopic Stage 2) and estuarine conditions during the Holocene. The strong correlation existing between the bedrock topography and the thickness of the Quaternary succession is indicative of the effectiveness of the LSLEB as a sediment trap.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".