Siliceous sublacustrine spring deposits around hydrothermal vents in Lake Taupo, New Zealand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chimneys around hydrothermal vents at a depth of c . 140 m in the Horomatangi Reefs area in Lake Taupo, New Zealand, are composed of amorphous silica (opal-A) with lesser amounts of Mn-, Fe-, and Hg-rich precipitates. Detrital quartz and feldspar grains are found in the surrounding sediments. The associated biota includes fish, bacteria, sponges, crayfish, amphipods, copepods, ostracodes, annelids, and other unidentified organisms. Much of this biota, however, is not preserved in the opal-A deposits. Instead, the silicified biota includes filamentous microbes and diatoms, scattered coccoid microbes, fungal hyphae and spores, rare sponge spicules, and rare worm(?) tubes. The diatoms, coccoid microbes, and fungi were brought into the area with the detrital sediment. In ancient successions, distinction between sublacustrine, terrestrial, and some marine hot spring deposits may be difficult because the precipitates share many similarities. Distinction based on the biota is viable only if palaeoecological information can be inferred from accurately identified organisms. Unfortunately, silicification commonly disguises microbes and precludes their accurate identification. Diagenetic transformation of opal-A to its more stable polymorphs also destroys many original depositional fabrics and silicified microbes. Distinction between the different types of spring deposit may therefore depend on the interpretation of their overall sedimentological and stratigraphic setting.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".