MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2525807940 · doi:10.1111/let.12193

A new approach to quantifying stratigraphical resolution: application to global stratotypes

2016· article· en· W2525807940 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueLethaia · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsJackknife resamplingGlobal Boundary Stratotype Section and PointGeologyHorizonStratotypePaleontologyStatisticsMathematicsStage (stratigraphy)Geometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Horizon annealing (HA) provides a method to order all horizons in a chronostratigraphic data set, including marker beds and isotopic excursions, as well as horizons that lack exact local markers (such as taxon first appearances) and are, thus, constrained only by local stratigraphical order. Global stratotype section and point (GSSP) levels placed within an HA composite succession can be precisely correlated with levels in all other sections in the composite that span the same interval. We present two approaches to the quantitative assessment of the uncertainty or error in the placement of horizons within the composite section: a permutation method (jackknife analysis) and a sensitivity analysis (the relaxed fit curve). From jackknife analysis, we calculate a standard deviation (σ) of the variation in horizon placements and estimate the 95% confidence interval of the variation in horizon placement within the composite. We also directly assess the relative stability of event positions using the results of the jackknife. These approaches provide an objective method for assessing the relative strengths of GSSP candidates, in which we prefer those sections and horizons that are the most precisely controlled in the HA composite. Integration of biostratigraphical, chemostratigraphical and lithostratigraphical marker horizons into the HA process markedly improves levels of constraint within the composite compared to biostratigraphical data alone. In a temporally scaled composite, the 95% confidence intervals on horizon placements could be used to estimate temporal resolution. In our study, we estimate that the average temporal resolution is approximately 319 kyr, which approaches the range of that needed to test hypotheses of orbitally driven cyclicity.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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)0.0010.003

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.250 · 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