MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2258896425 · doi:10.4095/287317

Monazite as a provenance indicator for the Lower Cretaceous reservoir sandstones, Scotian Basin

2010· report· en· W2258896425 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stavros Triantafyllidis, Georgia Pe‐Piper, R. Mackay, David J. W. Piper, G Strathdee

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProvenanceMonaziteGeologyCretaceousStructural basinGeochemistryPaleontologyZircon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geochronology of detrital monazite is a valuable tool for interpreting the detrital petrology of sedimentary basins. Because of its hardness, monazite can be transported long distances by rivers, but because it is susceptible to dissolution under acidic conditions, second cycle monazite is rarely abundant. Monazite geochronology has been applied to sandstones from the latest Jurassic and Lower Cretaceous Missisauga and Logan Canyon formations of the Scotian basin, in order to assess sediment sources and dispersal pathways for the deltaic sandstones. These sandstones are the principal reservoir rocks for oil and gas in the Scotian Basin. A total of 324 detrital monazite grains were identified from Lower Cretaceous sandstones from ten offshore fields or individual wells, providing an east to west transect of the Scotian Basin. Monazite grains were characterized by secondary electron or backscattered electron images, showing external morphology, zoning and inclusions, together with WDS X-ray maps and variations in major element chemistry (REE, Th, Y). From these grains, 688 age determinations with 1sin errors < ±20% were obtained by electron microprobe analysis. Based on all these criteria, about 30 distinct types of monazite grain are recognized, that show distinctive variations in their geographic and stratigraphic distribution and abundance. The one analysed sample from the Naskapi N-30 well appears to have had a discrete river source, draining only the Meguma Terrane. On the one hand, grains with a 440-550 Ma age mode in the central Scotian Basin closely resemble the dominant grain type in the Chaswood Formation in Nova Scotia, suggesting supply from the inboard Appalachian terranes of New Brunswick. On the other hand, the central Scotian Basin also includes common grains with Proterozoic ages that are absent from the Chaswood Formation, suggesting important supply from a river draining through Cabot Strait from western Newfoundland, or perhaps with minor supply from Labrador and the North Shore of Quebec. The Lower Missisauga Formation at Thebaud and Venture has significantly more Neoproterozoic monazites compared with the Upper Missisauga Formation and Cree Member throughout the central Scotian Basin. In the eastern Scotian Basin, Proterozoic grains predominate, but most monazite types are also recognised in the central Scotian Basin. This distribution suggests different dominant river supply to Peskowesk compared with the central Scotian Basin, probably draining the eastern side of the Long Range and the Appalachian rocks of western Newfoundland.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations10
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207