MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889746742 · doi:10.1139/cjes-2018-0035

New occurrences of <i>Palaeopascichnus</i> from the Stáhpogieddi Formation, Arctic Norway, and their bearing on the age of the Varanger Ice Age

2018· article· en· W2889746742 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Sören Jensen, Anette Högström, Magne Høyberget, Guido Meinhold, Duncan McIlroy, Jan Ove R. Ebbestad, Wendy L. Taylor, Heda Agić, Teodoro Palacios

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNorges Forskningsråd
KeywordsBalticaGeologyPaleontologyArcticPeninsulaRange (aeronautics)GlacierIce agePhysical geographyOrdovicianGlacial periodOceanographyArchaeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report on new occurrences of the late Ediacaran problematicum Palaeopascichnus (Protista?) from the Stáhpogieddi Formation, Arctic Norway. The stratigraphically lowest occurrences are in beds transitional between the Lillevannet and Indreelva members: the highest in the second cycle of the Manndrapselva Member, stratigraphically close to the lowest occurrences of Cambrian-type trace fossils. This establishes a long stratigraphical range of Palaeopascichnus on the Digermulen Peninsula, as has been previously documented from Newfoundland, South Australia, and elsewhere in Baltica. The age range of Palaeopascichnus in Avalonia and Baltica is from ∼565 to 541 Ma. Since the transition from the Mortensnes Formation to the Stáhpogieddi Formation is without a major break in sedimentation, this supports the inference that the underlying glacigenic Mortensnes Formation is ca. 580 Ma, and therefore Gaskiers-equivalent, or younger.

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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations27
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207