MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2188924118

The Moberly Member (Waterways Formation) Outcrops in the Athabasca Oil Sands Region: A new look at a classic correlation

2013· article· en· W2188924118 on OpenAlexaffabout
Chris L. Schneider, Matthias Grobe, Lindsey R. Leighton, Tyler E. Hauck

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutcropGeologyLithologyPaleontologyOil sandsStratigraphic unitFaunaSedimentary rockArchaeologyGeographyEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary We present an updated correlation and composite section of the Moberly Member (Waterways Formation) outcrops in the Athabasca Oil Sands mining region in Alberta. Notable trends in the lithology and paleontology of the outcrops include (a) a southward increase in the argillaceous portion of the sediment in the lower part of the section and a northward increase in argillaceous sedimentation in the upper portion of the section; (b) a general decline in fossil abundance and richness diversity in the upper portion of the section, along with the disappearance of some fossil taxa; (c) a northeastsouthwest trend in the Moberly Member biostrome unit from one dominated by branching, bulbous, and tabular forms in the northeast to one with only massive stromatoporoids surrounded by Radiatrypa brachiopods in the south to a presumably offshore, non-biostromal unit containing a diverse fauna and heavily bioturbated with Thalassinoides burrow networks in the southwest.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological formations and processes→French-language works237,207→