High-resolution gravity study of the Gray Fossil Site
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Gray Fossil Site, Washington County, Tennessee, has produced a remarkable Mio-Pliocene fauna and flora with no known correlative in the Appalachian region. After its discovery in 2000, a series of auger holes were drilled by the Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) to determine the areal extent of the site. Drilling indicated that the fossils occurred in fill material within a paleokarst basin, but the distribution of boreholes does not permit details of sinkhole topography, and therefore its formation and fill history, to be adequately resolved. To better image the sinkhole basin, a high-resolution gravity survey, which included 1104 gravity measurement stations, was conducted. These data were used to create complete Bouguer and residual gravity anomaly maps and a 3D density model via inversionmethods. The residual gravity anomaly map compares favorably with 29 TDOT auger holes drilled to basement, but contains significantly more detail. The residual gravity anomaly map reveals the presence of seven separate sinkholes. However, 3D inverse modeling constrained by drill-hole depths and density data indicates that there are 11 separate sinkholes formed within the Knox Group carbonates. These sinkholes, which range between 20 and 44m in depth, are aligned along northwest and northeast trending linear features that correlate to structural features formed during the Appalachian orogenies. It is possible that the overall sinkhole basin formed as the result of partial coalescence of multiple sinkhole structures controlled by a joint system and that the sinkholes then acted as a natural trap for the Gray Fossil Site fauna and flora.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".