Recognition of Devonian hydrocarbon source rocks in Beluga O-23 well, Hudson Bay Basin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Hudson Bay Basin is a Phanerozoic sedimentary basin in the eastern Canadian Arctic, whose succession is dominated by Ordovician to Devonian sediments and for which the hydrocarbon potential remains poorly understood. In the recent years, the Hudson Bay-Foxe basins project under the Geological Mapping for Energy and Mineral (GEM) Program has paid a great attention to the lower part of the Paleozoic succession comprising the Upper Ordovician and Lower Silurian. This present report focuses on the study of petroleum potential source rocks of the Devonian succession (Stooping River, Kwataboahegan, Moose River, Murray Island and William Island formations). A total of 50 well cutting samples were collected from 875 to 630 meter (Devonian succession) in the Beluga O-23 well, of which 28 contain dark, organic-rich fragments preferentially picked from the cuttings. The 28 samples were analyzed using Rock-Eval6 Pyrolysis technique. The Rock-Eval6 data show that the Devonian succession in the Beluga O-23 well contains immature high yield hydrocarbon potential source rocks with TOC ranging from 1.6 to17.64% (average 9.07%) and with a Type II kerogen signature. These hydrocarbon potential source rocks are mainly concentrated in five narrow zones within the selected interval from the upper part of the Stooping River Formation to the lower part of the Williams Island Formation as identified by the well log interpretation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".