Sedimentology of a wet, pre‐vegetation floodplain assemblage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Descriptions of fluvial systems operating prior to significant terrestrial macrophyte vegetation have concentrated on assessing the impact of plant evolution on channel style; this is probably in part due to the scarcity of well‐developed floodplain successions in fluvial assemblages of these ages. This study describes wet, pre‐vegetation floodplain deposits and processes observed and inferred from a continuous succession of drill core through an extensive, 1·4 Ga, delta‐top channel–floodplain assemblage forming a portion of the Sibley Group, Ontario, Canada. Sub‐aerial deposits are dominated by flaser, wavy and lenticular bedded, fine‐grained sandstones, siltstones and mudstones, with abundant small mudstone rip‐up clasts. Soft‐sediment deformation of these units is ubiquitous, with loading and injection features being the most prominent. Thicker medium‐grained sandstone beds, representing crevasse splays, commonly have poorly developed protosols in their upper portions. Well‐laminated sediments with wave ripples, and only rarely containing rip‐up clasts and soft‐sediment deformation, were deposited in floodplain ponds. These deposits differ from post‐vegetation floodplain sediments in having: (i) better preservation of layering without rootlet bioturbation; (ii) dominance of rippled sand on the floodplain, probably due to lack of vegetation‐induced baffling; (iii) large‐scale generation of small, intraformational clasts; (iv) desiccation crack fills consisting of peds and locally derived intraclasts, probably delivered during Horton overland flow during rainfall events; (v) ubiquitous soft‐sediment deformation features in sub‐aerial deposits; and (vi) well‐laminated, commonly oxidized sediment that accumulated in floodplain ponds. These attributes are the direct result of the lack of macrophyte vegetation, and produce floodplain assemblages that are distinctly different from those presently forming in similar climatic settings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".