MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170282152 · doi:10.1144/petgeo2011-046

Integrated tectonic basin modelling as an aid to understanding deep-water rifted continental margin structure and location

2013· article· en· W2170282152 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alan Roberts, Nick Kusznir, Richard I. Corfield, Richard Woodfine

Bibliographic record

VenuePetroleum Geoscience · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geophysical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyContinental marginTectonicsPalaeogeographyMargin (machine learning)Regional geologyStructural basinStructural geologyPaleontologyMetamorphic petrologyGeobiologyMagmatismTelmatologySeismologyVolcanism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An integrated workflow has been devised for the investigation of deep-water rifted continental margins. At a margin this allows us to predict the crustal structure, the distribution of continental-lithosphere thinning and the location of the ocean–continent transition with a new degree of confidence. The workflow combines the analytical techniques of 2D or 3D gravity inversion, 2D or 3D flexural backstripping with reverse thermal subsidence modelling, upper-crustal fault analysis and rifted margin forward modelling. No one technique on its own can provide all of the required answers, nor can it provide answers without some degree of uncertainty. The use of a combination of techniques, however, provides answers to several different problems and, crucially, more confidence in these answers. The workflow provides direct information on the present-day geometry of rifted margins and leads towards a better understanding of the geodynamic evolution of these margins. It also provides information which can inform the exploration process by making predictions about crustal structure at the ocean–continent transition, the location of the continent–ocean boundary, stretching-factor, heat-flow magnitude and history, palaeobathymetric history and subsurface palaeostructure. Application of the workflow is illustrated here with reference to the continental margins of West India, Brazil, West Australia, Norway and Newfoundland–Iberia.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations27
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePetroleum GeoscienceSame topicGeological and Geophysical StudiesFrench-language works237,207