MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333302702 · doi:10.1144/m35.40

Chapter 40 Baffin Fan and its inverted rift system of Arctic eastern Canada: stratigraphy, tectonics and petroleum resource potential

2011· article· en· W2333302702 on OpenAlexaffabout
John Harrison, T A Brent, G N Oakey

Bibliographic record

VenueGeological Society London Memoirs · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyRiftStratigraphyTectonicsArcticPaleontologyGeomorphologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Baffin Fan is a 12 km-thick sedimentary wedge of Eocene to Pleistocene age in northwestern Baffin Bay, with size and resource potential comparable to Beaufort–Mackenzie Basin. A widespread Moho detachment originating in Mesoproterozoic strata may have influenced development of Cretaceous–Palaeogene horst blocks and half-grabens throughout the region, and their transformation by later phases of inversion. Reflection profiles indicate 12 depositional sequences in lower Palaeozoic and Cretaceous to Pleistocene strata. Notable is syntectonic sedimentation with possible volcanism and rifting in the Cretaceous–Danian. Sequences associated with inversion in the later Paleocene and Eocene display out-of-graben thrust anticlines formed over horst blocks in Lady Ann and Lancaster Sound basins. The Oligocene to mid-Miocene is associated with fluvial–deltaic systems, replaced since then by glacial–interglacial sequences including submarine canyons and deepwater fans. Exploration targets are located in Lancaster Sound, and a Baffin Bay fairway that runs 220 km northwestward to east of Coburg Island. Sixty-five per cent of prospects are located under Neogene cover. Fourteen are each greater than 70 km 2 , and five are between 334 and 592 km 2 . Based on drilling success rates elsewhere and the existence of a petroleum system, 12 of the 40 mapped structures may contain hydrocarbons in significant quantity.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.849

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.146 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations35
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeological Society London MemoirsSame topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207