Chapter 36 Petroleum prospectivity of the Triassic–Jurassic succession of Sverdrup Basin, Canadian Arctic Archipelago
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Sverdrup Basin of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago is an established petroliferous, rift/sag basin with 17 discovered oil and gas fields. Almost all the hydrocarbons occur in Triassic–Jurassic shallow marine sandstones and were sourced from Middle to Upper Triassic bituminous shales. The discovered fields occur on the culminations of Palaeogene structures. Three prospective areas for future discoveries in the Triassic–Jurassic succession include western Sverdrup, southeastern Sverdrup and the Fosheim Peninsula area. Most of the large structures in these prospective areas were mapped and tested in the initial round of hydrocarbon exploration. The largest potential play which has not been tested involves a stratigraphic component as part of the hydrocarbon trapping mechanism. Potential reservoir units are developed on the third-order sequence scale and 22 such sequences have been delineated in the Triassic–Jurassic succession. Most of them contain a progradational, shallow marine sandstone unit which is in part porous within the prospective areas. These units are often truncated by unconformities on the basin margins and change facies to nonporous strata basinward. The pinchouts of these porous units in proper structural orientations provide good petroleum prospects because they were already present during the maturation and migration of the Triassic-sourced hydrocarbons.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 teacher head, 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".