MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2336729961 · doi:10.14288/1.0052573

Sediments of the central and southern Strait of Georgia, British Columbia

2011· article· en· W2336729961 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
C. H. Pharo

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyOceanographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study of the distribution, dispersal and composition of surficial sediments in the Strait of Georgia, B.C., has resulted in the understanding of basic sedimentologic conditions within this area. The Strait of Georgia is: a long, narrow, semi-enclosed basin with a restricted circulation and a single, main, sediment source. The Fraser. River supplies practically all the sediment now being deposited in the Strait of Georgia, the bulk of it during the spring and summer freshet. This river is building a delta into the Strait from the east side near the south end. Ridges of Pleistocene deposits within the Strait and Pleistocene material around the margins, like bedrock exposures, provide local sources of sediment of only minor importance. Rivers and streams other than the Fraser contribute insignificant quantities of sediment to the Strait. Sandy sediments are concentrated in the vicinity of the delta, and in the area to the south and southeast. Mean grain size decreases from the delta toward the northwest along the axis of the Strait, and basinwards from the margins. Silts and clays are deposited in deep water west and north of the delta front, and in deep basins northwest of the delta. Poorly sorted sediments containing a gravel component are located near tidal passes, on the Vancouver Island shelf area, on ridge tops within the Strait, and with sandy sediments at the southeastern end of the study area. The Pleistocene ridges are areas of non-deposition, having at most a thin veneer of modern mud on their crests and upper flanks. The southeastern end of the study area contains a thick wedge of shandy sediment which appears to be part of an earlier delta of the Fraser River. Evidence suggests that it is now a site of active submarine erosion. Sediments throughout the Strait are compositionally extremely similar, with-Pleistocene deposits of the Fraser River drainage basin providing the principal, heterogeneous source. Gravels and coarse sands are composed primarily of lithic fragments, dominantly of dioritic to granodloritlc composition. Sand fractions exhibit increasing simplicity of mineralogy with decreasing grain-size. Quartz, felspar, amphibole and fine-grained lithic fragments are the dominant constituents of the finer sand grades. Coarse and medium silt fractions have compositions similar to the fine sands. Fine silts show an increase in abundance of phyllosilicate material, a feature even more evident in the clay-size fractions on Montmorillonite, illite, chlorite, quartz and feldspar are the main minerals in the coarse clay fraction, with minor mixed-layer clays and kaolinite. The fine clay fraction is dominated by montmorillonite, with lesser amounts of illite and chlorite. The sediments have high base-exchange capacities, related to a considerable content of montmorillonite. Magnesium is present in exchange positions in greater quantity in Georgia Strait sediments than in sediments from the Fraser River, indicating a preferential uptake of this element in the marine environment. Manganese nodules collected from two localities in the Strait imply slow sediment accumulation rates at these sites. Sedimentation rates on and close to the delta, and in the deep basins to the northwest, are high.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.139
Teacher spread0.130 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207