MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562243282 · doi:10.1111/bre.12232

Geological controls on the present temperature field of the western Sverdrup Basin, Canadian Arctic Archipelago

2016· article· en· W2562243282 on OpenAlexaffabout
Zhuoheng Chen, Stephen E. Grasby, Keith Dewing, Tom Brent

Bibliographic record

VenueBasin Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
FundersDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
KeywordsGeologyStructural basinPaleontologyArchipelagoSverdrupArcticAnticlineDiapirOrogenyUnconformityOceanographyGeomorphologyGeochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Analysis of current temperature data in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago results in the recognition of two major thermal regimes. High temperature regions are observed where salt diapirs and salt cored anticlines are present. Low temperature fields are observed along the western and southern basin margins and around Cornwall‐Amund Ringnes islands, where regional Mesozoic aquifers are exposed to surface, connected to basin boundary faults, or regional unconformities. Meteoric and Holocene sub‐glacial water recharge are inferred to be responsible for the low geothermal regime and low formation water salinity. Neither exhumation associated with the Eocene “Eurekan” orogeny nor volcanic intrusion associated with opening of Amerasia Basin in late Jurassic‐early Cretaceous have been interpreted to be a significant influence on the present day temperature field, although thermal indicators show evidence of elevated thermal alteration of organic matter pointing to earlier, but now dissipated, thermal anomalies.

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)0.001
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBasin ResearchSame topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207