MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2261756734 · doi:10.4236/ijg.2016.71008

Whole-Rock Geochemistry and Mineralogy of Triassic Montney Formation, Northeastern British Columbia, Western Canada Sedimentary Basin

2016· article· en· W2261756734 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Edwin I. Egbobawaye

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Geosciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeochemistry and Elemental Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsGeologyDiagenesisPetrographyGeochemistrySedimentary rockDolomitizationSource rockTrace elementMineralogyPaleontologyStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inductively Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS) was used to analyze chemical elementsmajor, trace and rare earth elements (REE) concentrations, augmented with quantitative X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis and thin-section petrography for mineralogical characterization of the Triassic Montney Formation in northeastern British Columbia, Western Canada Sedimentary Basin (WCSB). Results from this study indicate that integration of chemical elements with mineralogy shows affinity to the host lithologies. Evidently, chemical elements are the building blocks for minerals, thus, their significances in the interpretation of geological systems are unambiguous. Herein, major elements concentration such as Al, Fe, K, Mg, Ca, Mn in the samples analyzed from the Montney Formation are interpreted as: 1) indication of dolomitization and diagenesis; 2) trace elements-Rb, Th, U, and Cs are related to the organic matter-kerogen in the clay component of the Montney Formation source rock; and 3) transition metals-Sc, V, Co, Cr, Zn show strong affinity with diagenesis in the study interval.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 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

Citations14
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of GeosciencesSame topicGeochemistry and Elemental AnalysisFrench-language works237,207