MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2271004518 · doi:10.2110/jsr.2015.78

Stratigraphic Expression of Intra-Point-Bar Erosion and Rotation

2015· article· en· W2271004518 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sedimentary Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsGeologyPoint barPoint (geometry)Bar (unit)Rotation (mathematics)ErosionExpression (computer science)GeomorphologyGeodesyGeometryPaleontologyMathematicsOceanographyFluvialStructural basinComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: Meander belts are characterized by a complex amalgam of point bars and associated depositional elements, such as oxbow-lake fills. Point-bar deposits are composite elements often characterized by complex scroll-bar patterns formed in response to processes of expansion, rotation, and translation of a meander bend. Intra-point-bar erosion is commonly observed in modern river systems, yet its product is rarely described from the ancient record. Late Cretaceous meander-belt deposits, consisting of a transition from a point-bar to counter-point-bar deposit, as well as an associated abandoned channel fill, crop out in south central Alberta, Canada. The strata are characterized by widespread evidence for intra-point bar deposit erosion and punctuated rotation. In the stratigraphic record, intra-point bar deposit erosion and punctuated rotation is expressed by steeply dipping discordant surfaces (up to 20°), which truncate previously deposited lateral-accretion packages. Across these erosion surfaces the direction of bar migration often rotates significantly, up to 50°. Subsequent accretion surfaces onlap intra-point-bar-deposit erosion surfaces. The analysis reveals that point-bar surfaces are formed through a complex interplay of erosional and depositional processes along their length, resulting in stratigraphic surfaces that may be highly composite. This study departs from more simplistic process models of point bars that consider deposits to be the product of continuous lateral accretion, and as such has important implications for paleoenvironmental reconstructions and subsurface reservoir characterization.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.700

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.237 · 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