MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2940887759 · doi:10.4095/314567

Reference surface and subsurface sections of the Besa River Formation, Liard Basin, British Columbia

2019· report· en· W2940887759 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pavel Kabanov, B C Richards, Hyun Suk Lee, Poshan Thapa, H M King, Andrew J. Mort

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyStructural basinMineralogySurface (topology)ChemistryGeomorphologyGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Middle Devonian to Upper Mississippian Besa River Formation (currently being elevated to a group by other authors) is a thick (300-1000 m) gas-prone succession of organic-rich basinal shales, bedded chert, and fine-grained limestone widely preserved in the Liard Basin of British Columbia, Yukon Territory, and Northwest Territories. The Besa River contains a major frontier shale-gas prospect in the Famennian to lower Tournaisian Exshaw Member and underlying informal Patry unit. The internal stratigraphic framework of the Besa River is poorly known and warrants intensive study because of its substantial economic significance. This report provides illustrated descriptions, lithologs, and spectral gamma surveys of one outcrop and three cored sections of the Besa River in the Liard Basin of B.C. and in the adjacent western part of the Horn River Basin. This study is part of the joint activity of Geological Survey of Canada, Korea Institute of Geoscience and Mineral Resources (KIGAM), and Filippo Ferri of B.C. Ministry of Natural Gas Development.

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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.129

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.190 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207