Differentiating Amalgamated Parasequences in Deltaic Settings Using Ichnology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Wall Creek Member in the Salt Creek oilfield at first glance appears to be a thick, undifferentiated sandbody, in marked contrast to its nearby outcrop counterpart. The signature of this unit in gamma and SP well logs is “blocky”, superficially resembling incised valley fill deposits. A closer examination, which integrates physical sedimentology and ichnology of 1200m of cores from 40 wells, demonstrates that the apparently blocky depositional unit has no genetic or scale difference with the deltaic parasequences separated by distinct prodelta shales encountered in the outcrop. Clear changes in ichnofacies allow us to subdivide the blocky unit into at least five shoaling upward deltaic parasequences punctuated by subtle expressions of a relatively more distal though sand-prone facies. Subsurface correlation indicates progradation of the parasequences towards the southeast. Cores from fifteen wells were scrutinized in greater detail to accurately record the bioturbation intensity, ichnological diversity, trace fossil size, and ichnological suites. This detailed facies analysis yields 4 facies associations. They are, river-dominated deltaic deposits (Facies Association 1), wave-/storm-influenced deltaic/shoreface deposits (Facies Association 2), tidally influenced deltaic deposits (Facies Association 3) and marine transgression related deposits (Facies Association 4). Of these, facies associations 1-3 correspond to delta lobes and shorefaces that show varying influences of river, waves/storms and tides.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".