MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101140312 · doi:10.1306/06250909039

Crossing conjugate normal faults in field exposures and seismic data

2009· article· en· W2101140312 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
David A. Ferrill, Alan P. Morris, Ronald N. McGinnis

Bibliographic record

VenueAAPG Bulletin · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySeismologyConjugateField (mathematics)Normal faultPotential fieldGeophysicsFault (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Crossing conjugate normal faults are common in many hydrocarbon-producing basins. In these settings, they exert a range of influences from trapping hydrocarbon accumulations to producing permeability anisotropy by preferentially enhancing or reducing permeability, and reducing effective thicknesses of seal and reservoir units. The fault intersection region is typically poorly imaged with seismic data, and consequently, developing a coherent interpretation of deformation in the intersection region is difficult. In this article, we explore crossing conjugate normal faults across two orders of magnitude of displacement using clear field exposures from the western United States and subsurface examples from the Jeanne d'Arc Basin, offshore Newfoundland. We demonstrate common structural elements and potential pitfalls associated with interpretation of crossing conjugate normal faults, and emphasize the widespread and often unrecognized occurrence of these structures.

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)0.002
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations55
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAAPG BulletinSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207