MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2579088544 · doi:10.1144/jgs2016-111

The detrital record of Cretaceous to Pliocene sandstones across the NE South American margin

2017· article· en· W2579088544 on OpenAlexaff
Hasley Vincent, Grant Wach

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Geological Society · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersMinistry of Energy and Energy IndustriesSociety for Sedimentary Geology
KeywordsGeologyCretaceousPaleontologyMargin (machine learning)Clastic rockMesozoicSedimentary rockStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Cretaceous to Pliocene erosional history of the NE South American margin depicts the increasing influence of the uplifting Caribbean Mountain belt. Petrographic analyses of 59 Cretaceous to Late Pliocene sandstone samples derived from across the islands of Trinidad and Barbados, demonstrate systematic mineralogical changes whereby Early Cretaceous arkosic arenites gave way to mature quartz arenites by the Late Cretaceous and Caribbean Mountain-derived lithic-rich arenites during the Neogene. Changes in the framework compositions are accompanied by changes in textural attributes, with Caribbean Mountain detritus being notably finer grained than cratonic input. Silica cements predominate in quartzose sandstones and sericitic and clay cements within litharenites. The changing mineralogical compositions record the gradual deformation of the northern South American passive margin and initiation of the Andean–Caribbean Mountain foreland basin system, with incipient orogenic detritus evident from the latest Eocene and unambiguous orogenic input by the Late Oligocene. The preponderance of finer grain sizes within deltaic Pliocene sandstones records the later fill of an established foredeep with sediments sourced primarily from erosion of the Andean hinterland. These interpretations agree with heavy mineral compositional changes and the timing of uplift from geo- and thermo-chronological data across the margin. Supplementary material: Qualitative descriptions, sample coordinates and raw point counts are available at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.3659381

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 score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Geological SocietySame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207