MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897788467 · doi:10.3997/2214-4609.201801045

The Petroleum Prospectivity of the Central Ridge to Flemish Cap Region, Offshore Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada

2018· article· en· W2897788467 on OpenAlexaffabout
D. Norris, Victoria Mitchell, D.G. Cameron, J. Carter

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsNalcor Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProspectivity mappingGrabenGeologyFlemishPetroleumSubmarine pipelineStructural basinProspectionPetroleum explorationSeismologyMining engineeringPaleontologyOceanographyGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Offshore Newfoundland and Labrador has become an area of interest for the petroleum exploration community over the last number of years, with landsale activity, exploration wells drilled and increased seismic acquisition. The area of focus for this study is along the southern trend of the Flemish Pass Basin, where a lot of this activity has been focused. The focus is on the petroleum prospectivity of the Central Ridge to the Flemish Cap area and will define the potential for source, reservoir, trap and seal. This is an underexplored area adjacent to the prolific Jeanne d’Arc Basin where oil and gas production has been ongoing for a number of years. Acquisition of recent extensive, modern 2D long offset broadband seismic data throughout the region has been conducted on a 5 km by 5 km grid. Interpretation of this data has allowed seismic correlations to be made from proven discoveries into this underexplored area. The presence and distribution of the elements required for an active petroleum system have been identified. This newly acquired data has greatly resolved the extents and internal architecture of the Anson, southern Flemish Pass and Flemish Cap grabens providing further insight to the petroleum potential of the area.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.500
Threshold uncertainty score0.950

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.178 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedingsSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207