Fluvial Architecture of the Hawkesbury Sandstone (Triassic), Near Sydney, Australia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Hawkesbury Sandstone has long been assumed to represent the deposits of a large braided river system, comparable in style and magnitude with the modern Brahmaputra River of Bangladesh. Such an interpretation is based mainly on the common occurrence of very large-scale crossbedding, but no architectural studies of the unit have hitherto been carried out. This paper represents a first attempt to estimate the magnitude of Hawkesbury channels and bars on the basis of the preserved architectural evidence. Photomosaics were constructed of two cliff sections south of Sydney, one 5.6 km in length. On the basis of these profiles we estimate that characteristic channel-scale architectural elements are at least 2.7 km wide, and individual macroforms are 5-10 m high, indicating the constructional depth of typical channels. Hollow elements (scoop-shaped units interpreted to have formed at channel confluences) are up to 20 m deep. These magnitudes are large, but measurably smaller that those of channels and bars in the modern Brahmaputra River of Bangladesh.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".