The Co-Occurence of <i>Trypanites</i> and <i>Glossifungites</i> Substrate-Controlled Trace-Fossil Assemblages In A Triassic Mixed Siliciclastic–Carbonate Depositional System: Baldonnel Formation, Williston Lake, B.C., Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Detailed outcrop analysis of an Upper Triassic, shallow marine, mixed siliciclastic–carbonate ramp succession in northwestern Canada reveals numerous disconformities that are characterized by substrate-controlled trace-fossil assemblages. Although Glossifungites assemblages, and to a lesser extent, Trypanites assemblages, are common in the Upper Carnian Baldonnel Formation, in several horizons, a pattern of paired Trypanites–Glossifungites-demarcated discontinuity surfaces occurs. These paired surfaces occur in the same overall environmental setting and are interpreted to have the same general stratigraphic implications in each case. The Trypanites surfaces invariably occur lower in the section. They penetrate into sandy bioclastic limestone and are infilled and overlain by a coarse-grained detrital lag. Their development indicates early cementation in a coastal setting. The Trypanites surfaces form coplanar maximum regressive surfaces and transgressive surfaces of erosion and are correlatable on a regional scale. The lags are overlain, in turn, by laminated calcareous siltstone (denoting offshore deposition) and bioclastic sandstone (a return to shoreface depositional conditions). The siltstone–sandstone contacts are characterized by low-diversity Glossifungites assemblages, which are interpreted as an amalgamated succession of storm-induced wave ravinement surfaces emplaced in front of a rapidly prograding shoreface. Paired Trypanites–Glossifungites surfaces in the Baldonnel Formation reflect fluctuations in relative sea level and sediment input in an overall low accommodation mixed siliciclastic–carbonate ramp setting.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".