MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124565668 · doi:10.2110/jsr.2012.21

Seasonal Controls On the Development And Character of Inclined Heterolithic Stratification In A Tide-Influenced, Fluvially Dominated Channel: Fraser River, Canada

2012· article· en· W2124565668 on OpenAlexaffabout
C. F. Sisulak, Shahin E. Dashtgard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sedimentary Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyStratification (seeds)Character (mathematics)Channel (broadcasting)PaleontologyOceanographyGeomorphologyGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Inclined heterolithic stratification (interbedded sand and mud with depositional dip; IHS) is developed on an in-channel bar in the tide-influenced, fluvially dominated (brackish water) reach of the Fraser River, British Columbia, Canada. The vertical bar succession is characterized by a fining-upward profile with an increase in mud content and mud-bed thickness from the shallow subtidal zone to the upper intertidal zone. There is also an increase in the number and lateral continuity of mud beds from the upstream side to the downstream side of the bar. Sand beds are dominated by current ripples in the intertidal zone, and by current ripples and trough cross-beds in the shallow subtidal zone. The channel base is mantled by downstream (ebb)-oriented dune-scale bedforms. Mud beds are dominantly parallel laminated, although current ripples may develop in silt-rich and sand-rich mud beds. Current-generated bedforms are predominantly ebb-oriented. Sediment deposition is seasonally controlled. Sand deposition occurs during periods of high discharge (snowmelt-induced freshet), and mud is deposited during waning freshet flow and low discharge (base flow). In mud-dominated deposits, current ripples may develop in sand-rich mud beds deposited during the freshet. Seasonal cyclicity in sediment deposition is also recorded in the ichnological characteristics of the IHS. Bioturbation is significantly more common in base-flow deposits (mud beds) than freshet deposits (sand beds). Burrows in sand beds typically subtend from overlying mud beds. Diminutive, vertical burrows dominate the trace suite, reflecting a very low diversity of infauna. Bioturbation is more common on the downstream side of the bar, associated with the thicker and more laterally contiguous mud beds. Based on these observations, seasonal cyclicity in channel-bar deposits, formed in tide-influenced, fluvially dominated channels, can be identified using a combination of sedimentological and ichnological characteristics, particularly in mud-dominated successions and in IHS. In mud-dominated deposits, seasonal controls are best-expressed ichnologically through the interbedding of bioturbated and unbioturbated intervals. The dominance of a low-diversity suite of mainly vertical traces can also be considered indicative of brackish-water conditions in the channel. In IHS successions, interbedded sand and mud beds are the best indicators of seasonal cyclicity: sand beds are typically unburrowed, and mud beds are burrowed. In sand-dominated successions that lack mud interbeds, it is difficult to recognize seasonal cyclicity.

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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations111
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sedimentary ResearchSame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207