MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097838776 · doi:10.1144/0016-76492005-088

Early dolomitization and recrystallization of carbonate in an evaporite basin: the Middle Devonian Ratner laminite in southern Saskatchewan, Canada

2006· article· en· W2097838776 on OpenAlexaffabout
Qilong Fu, Hairuo Qing, Katherine M. Bergman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Geological Society · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvaporiteDolomitizationGeologyDevonianCarbonateRecrystallization (geology)PaleontologyGeochemistryStructural basinCarboniferousCarbonate platformDiagenesisPaleozoicFacies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study provides an example of early dolomitization of basinal limestone associated with a giant evaporite deposit. The Middle Devonian Ratner carbonate is extensively to completely replaced by microcrystalline to finely crystalline dolomite in the southern and central part of southern Saskatchewan in the Elk Point Basin. In the northern part, however, individual cored intervals of the Ratner laminite are either completely dolomitized or contain no microcrystalline to finely crystalline dolomite. Stratigraphic, petrographical and Sr-isotopic data suggest that the Ratner dolomite has formed penecontemporaneously from dense, evaporitic seawater that percolated downward. The distribution of the Ratner dolomite is highly localized in the northern part of the study area, suggesting that the downward flow of Mg 2+ -rich fluids was restricted by interbedded anhydrite, but where the fluids penetrated, the underlying carbonate deposits were dolomitized. The depletion in 18 O isotope (varying from −4.5 to −6.6‰ PDB), and the coarser and inhomogeneous textures of the Ratner dolomite are considered to be the result of recrystallization, which is interpreted to occur at elevated temperatures related to a thermal anomaly during the Late Devonian and Carboniferous burial.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.705
Threshold uncertainty score0.788

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 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

Citations26
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Geological SocietySame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207