Petrography of Finely Crystalline Cenozoic Dolostones as Revealed by Backscatter Electron Imaging: Case Study of the Cayman Formation (Miocene), Grand Cayman, British West Indies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Finely crystalline Cenozoic island dolostones, like those found in the Cayman Formation on Grand Cayman, are commonly assumed to be petrographically and compositionally homogeneous. Backscatter electron images (BSEI), however, show that the constituent dolomite crystals (< 100 μm long and commonly < 20 μm long) are commonly zoned with respect to their mol % CaCO3 content. Moreover, such images allow (1) depiction of growth patterns in the constituent crystals, irrespective of their origin, (2) recognition of replacive dolomite as opposed to dolomite cement, and (3) delineation of "stratigraphic packages" in the dolomite cements that reflect different episodes of cementation. Integration of this information forms the basis for paragenetic interpretations of the dolostones. On Grand Cayman, the Miocene Cayman Formation can be divided into friable, high-porosity dolostones and hard, low-porosity dolostones. Backscatter electron images show that the hard dolostones are characterized by complex arrays of zoned dolomite cements that have occluded most of the pores. Caymanite, an internal sediment, has occluded many of the larger cavities. In contrast, the high-porosity dolostones contain little cement and no internal sediments. Precipitation of the cements and the deposition of internal sediments were related to the passage of large volumes of water through some of the dolostones. Thus, the hard, low-porosity dolostones are found in the "cap rock" of the formation, in coastal locations, and in areas close to solution-widened fractures. Conversely, the friable, high-porosity dolostones form the lower "porous unit" of the formation in the interior of the island, where the passage of water was more restricted.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".