MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068310048 · doi:10.1080/00206810109465058

Provenance Ages of Cretaceous Strata in the Songliao Basin, Northeast China Inferred from Fission Track Data

2001· article· en· W2068310048 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Osamu Himeno, Hiroto Ohira, Zhaojun Liu, Xue Jin, Koichiro Watanabe

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Geology Review · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRikkyo UniversityDalhousie University
KeywordsGeologyCretaceousFission track datingProvenanceSedimentary depositional environmentZirconStructural basinVolcanic rockPaleontologyVolcanoRiftGeochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Songliao Basin in northeast China is an intra-continental fossil rift basin mainly developed from the latest Jurassic and throughout the Cretaceous. The Daqing oil field in the basin is one of the largest hydrocarbon exploitation areas in China. A fission track (FT) study has been carried out on sandstone well samples in the Songliao Basin to constrain the depositional ages of Cretaceous strata and to ascertain their source region. FT dating also has been carried out on welded tuffs in the Dahinganling Mountains to determine their eruption ages. The detrital zircon FT age suggests that the depositional age of the middle Quantou Formation is younger than 109 Ma. Zircon FT ages for Cretaceous strata (from the Nenjiang Formation to the Quantou Formation) suggest that the source region has a fairly homogeneous cooling history at ∼120-100 Ma. Eruption ages of welded tuffs in the Dahinganling Mountains show an age range from 110 to 92 Ma. The regional geology and FT data suggest that volcanic rocks in the Dahinganling Mountains were eroded soon after their deposition and were reworked toward the Songliao basin.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Geology ReviewSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207