MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Facies Analysis, Sedimentology and Paleocurrent of The Quaternary Nenering Formation, Pengkalan Hulu, Malaysia

2014· article· en· W2276608262 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yuniarti Ulfa, Evonne Hooi Rong Yu, Ooi Cheng Kit

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geophysical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConglomerateGeologySiltstoneFaciesPaleocurrentSedimentologySedimentary rockGeomorphologySedimentary structuresClastic rockGeochemistryLithologySedimentary depositional environmentStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nenering Formation is essentially made up of semi-consolidated sediments, which are divided into basal conglomerate beds, conglomeratic sandstone, cross-bedded sandstone, and siltstone to muddy layers facies. It is overlie unconformable to the Berapit Formation, but conformable to the Kroh and Grik Formations. The stratigraphy of Nenering Formation is a fining upwards sequence where the thickness of conglomerate beds become thinner upwards and become thicker for conglomeratic sandstone. The thickness varies from 0.5 m to tenths of meters. The more sandy in the upper portion (cross-bedded sandstone) overlie with thin siltstone and mudstone facies. The clast and grain composition suggested that the material making up the sedimentary sequence were derived predominantly from the erosion of granitoid rocks and sedimentary and metamorphic rocks constitute a minor provenance. Imbrications and the trend sizes of clasts indicate that the palaeo-current flow toward northeast. Cross bedding that was found in conglomerate and sandstone indicates the main channel depositional environment. The sequence stratigraphy of this area match with the Saskatchewan fluvial braided channel model.

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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicGeological and Geophysical StudiesFrench-language works237,207