MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2344332614 · doi:10.1111/sed.12291

Recognition criteria, characteristics and implications of the fluvial to marine transition zone in ancient deltaic deposits (Lajas Formation, Argentina)

2016· article· en· W2344332614 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSedimentology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBHP BillitonStatoilQueen's UniversityUniversity of Leeds
KeywordsFluvialGeologyFaciesPaleontologyGeomorphologyStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The seaward end of modern rivers is characterized by the interactions of marine and fluvial processes, a tract known as the fluvial to marine transition zone, which varies between systems due to the relative strength of these processes. To understand how fluvial and tidal process interactions and the fluvial to marine transition zone are preserved in the rock record, large‐scale outcrops of deltaic deposits of the Middle Jurassic Lajas Formation (Neuquén Basin, Argentina) have been investigated. Fluvial–tidal indicators consist of cyclically distributed carbonaceous drapes in unidirectional, seaward‐oriented cross‐stratifications, which are interpreted as the result of tidal modulation of the fluvial current in the inner part of the fluvial to marine transition zone. Heterolithic deposits with decimetre‐scale interbedding of coarser‐grained and finer‐grained facies with mixed fluvial and tidal affinities are interpreted to indicate fluvial discharge fluctuations (seasonality) and subordinate tidal influence. Many other potential tidal indicators are argued to be the result of fluvial–tidal interactions with overall fluvial dominance or of purely fluvial processes. No purely tidal or tide‐dominated facies were recognized in the studied deposits. Moreover, fluvial–tidal features are found mainly in deposits interpreted as interflood (forming during low river stage) in distal (delta front) or off‐axis (interdistributary) parts of the system. Along major channel axes, the interpreted fluvial to marine transition zone is mainly represented by the fluvial‐dominated section, whereas little or no tide‐dominated section is identified. The system is interpreted to have been hyposynchronous with a poorly developed turbidity maximum. These conditions and the architectural elements described, including major and minor distributary channels, terminal distributary channels, mouth bars and crevasse mouth bars, are consistent with an interpretation of a fluvial‐dominated, tide‐influenced delta system and with an estimated short backwater length and inferred microtidal conditions. The improved identification of process interactions, and their preservation in ancient fluvial to marine transition zones, is fundamental to refining interpretations of ancient deltaic successions.

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)0.000
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 score0.422
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.208 · 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