MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050641239 · doi:10.1190/int-2014-0129.1

Sequence stratigraphy of a mixed siliciclastic-carbonate setting, Scotian Shelf, Canada

2015· article· en· W2050641239 on OpenAlexaffabout
Farrukh Qayyum, Octavian Catuneanu, Crépin Eric Bouanga

Bibliographic record

VenueInterpretation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSiliciclasticGeologyPaleontologySequence stratigraphyCarbonateSequence (biology)Carbonate platformStratigraphySedimentary depositional environmentStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract During the Jurassic Period, a large-scale carbonate bank (Abenaki Formation) and a siliciclastic (Sable) delta coexisted in North America. Conventionally, carbonate systems (in situ) are separated from siliciclastic systems (transported) because of their contrasting origin. However, we developed a case study to show that the basic principles of sequence stratigraphy remain applicable. We integrated the results obtained from a regional 2D study and a detailed follow-up study using 3D seismic data of the Scotian Shelf, Canada. The results were integrated with the prepared Wheeler diagrams, and a unified sequence stratigraphic framework was proposed. We determined that two second-order sequences were developed on a larger scale during the Jurassic Period. The first sequence developed during the transition from a ramp to rimmed margin. The second sequence developed during the evolution from a rimmed to ramp margin. These sequences formed a distinct stratigraphic style throughout the Scotian Shelf. The siliciclastic supply varied from the northeast to the southwest depending on the studied site; however, the regions close to the siliciclastic supply contained well-defined clinoform patterns. The topsets of such clinoforms were mostly eroded. Their directions were also found to be different than the carbonate-related clinoform geometries. Most of the carbonates were developed; as such, they kept up and prograded toward a backreef margin during the rimming stages. The second-order sequences were further subdivided into four third-order sequences. These were studied using the 3D seismic data and were found to contain several barrier reefs that could have stratigraphic exploration potential in the Penobscot area.

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)0.000
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 score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations21
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInterpretationSame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207