MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2600683004 · doi:10.1306/021417dig17099

Deep-water clastic systems in the Upper Carboniferous (Upper Mississippian–Lower Pennsylvanian) Shannon Basin, western Ireland

2017· article· en· W2600683004 on OpenAlexaff
Ole J. Martinsen, Andrew J. Pulham, T. Elliott, Peter D. W. Haughton, Colm Pierce, Anthea Lacchia, Simon P. Barker, Arnau Obradors Latre, Ian Kane, Patrick M. Shannon, George D. Sevastopulo

Bibliographic record

VenueAAPG Bulletin · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPennsylvanianCarboniferousGeologyClastic rockPaleontologyStructural basinDeep waterPaleozoicOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The Upper Carboniferous Shannon Basin of western Ireland contains a more-than-2300-m-thick (7540 ft) basin-fill succession, shallowing upward from deep-water to deltaic and incised fluvial deposits. The deep-water basin floor and slope succession is world renowned as an analog for hydrocarbon-bearing deep-water sandstones on several continental margins such as the basins in East and West Africa, South America, the Gulf of Mexico, and not least offshore northwest Europe. The Shannon Basin is frequently visited by both academia and industry for research and training purposes. A series of behind-outcrop research boreholes reveals the subsurface expression of the deep-water rocks and is complemented by seismic-scale cliff exposures. The succession is interpreted as a first-order basin-scale linked sedimentary system. This system can be analyzed using the principles of source-to-sink analysis and leaves the visitor with a complete picture of the basin fill, enhanced by spectacular sedimentological and stratigraphic detail.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.343
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.197 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations10
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAAPG BulletinSame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207