MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2189434188

Waulsortian-like Mound and Associated Facies in South-central Saskatchewan: Implications for Hydrocarbon Exploration

2008· article· en· W2189434188 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Erik H. Nickel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyFaciesEvaporiteDevonianPaleontologySlumpingOil shaleGeochemistryOrdovicianClastic rockStratigraphySedimentary rockTectonicsStructural basin
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

South-central Saskatchewan is an under-drilled and under-developed area, so a study was started in 2004 to improve understanding of the stratigraphy and oil potential in this region. Subsurface geological mapping revealed that Waulsortian-like mud mounds were relatively common in Mississippian Souris Valley strata, which comprise four main facies types: 1) the Cromer Shale, a basal transgressive unit sitting on the Bakken Formation; 2) slope and debris-flow facies traced downdip as clinobeds; 3) platform deposits of cleaner crinoidal limestone; and 4) crinoid- and bryozoa-rich limestones of the Waulsortian-like mounds. Mapping and sedimentological study of underlying units suggest that the formation of the mounds is related to the structural development of the Roncott Platform, a relative ‘high’ where Mississippian strata overlie an erosional remnant of the Devonian Prairie Evaporite Formation. The mounds are mostly situated on the flanks of this platform, their location and growth possibly conditioned by normal faulting caused by periodic dissolution of the Prairie Evaporite Formation. The Waulsortian-like mounds and associated facies provide an interesting target for oil exploration. The Roncott Platform, as a regional high, makes much of the area prospective for hydrocarbon development. The mounds have shelter, moldic and fracture porosity, and are encased in organic-rich limestones which are potential source rocks. The Dickenson Field in North Dakota is a prolific oil producer and is a play very similar to that described here.

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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis→French-language works237,207→