MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803276500 · doi:10.2110/jsr.2018.31

The Sedimentology of an ERG Margin: The Kayenta–Navajo Transition (Lower Jurassic), Kanab, Utah, U.S.A.

2018· article· en· W2803276500 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Hassan, Anastasios Venetikidis, Gerald Bryant, Andrew D. Miall

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sedimentary Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCitationGeologistGeologyState (computer science)Library scienceArchaeologyArt historyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract During the Early Jurassic, the Navajo Sandstone erg, possibly the largest that has existed on Earth, spread gradually southward and eastward through Utah and into Arizona, and across erg-margin deposits of the fluvial Kayenta Formation. The transition was cyclic, with at least three and locally as many as thirteen fluvial tongues of ephemeral fluvial deposits extending into the erg. The present study examines this transitional interval in the Kanab area of southern Utah, where there are three distinct fluvial–eolian cycles. These cycles can be tentatively traced for some 200 km eastward, suggesting allogenic control on the deposition of these deposits. Facies assemblages are interpreted in terms of cycles of increasing aridity. Cycle development generally began with the accumulation of ephemeral fluvial deposits in terminal-fan environments. Deposits of channelized flow pass upward into sheet-like deposits recording unconfined flow, and the cycles culminated in short periods of rapid eolian bedform accumulation, followed by intense regional deflation during times of maximum aridity, with the formation of erosional super surfaces. It is likely that the climatic control of this succession was orbital forcing, but given the lack of detailed chronostratigraphic control for the Kayenta–Navajo interval it is not possible to suggest a likely orbital frequency.

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)0.004
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations24
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sedimentary ResearchSame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207