No evidence for an unconformity at the base of the lower Castlegate Sandstone in the Campanian Book Cliffs, Utah–Colorado, United States: Implications for sequence stratigraphic models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Regional high-resolution correlations of the Campanian Desert Member of the Blackhawk Formation to the lower Castlegate Sandstone interval, Book Cliffs, Utah–Colorado, show no evidence for a single, throughgoing unconformity separating the amalgamated channel sandstones of the Castlegate from the underlying Blackhawk Formation coastal-plain deposits. This is a facies contact, which interfingers both laterally and vertically. Channel incisions are discrete and mostly confined to individual parasequences. They do not coalesce landward into gigantic valleys as shown in the conventional model but are restricted to the proximal shoreface and are rarely traceable for more than a few kilometers landward. Timelines extend uninterrupted from the shallow marine into the neighboring coastal-plain deposits, connecting flooding surfaces with coals. Shoreface sandstones emerge from the adjacent coastal plain. This has significant implications for modeling in similar clastic settings worldwide. Conventional sequence stratigraphic models of fluviodeltaic systems show radically different stacking patterns compared to those of the high-resolution model presented herein. Each model carries a significantly different prediction regarding the three-dimensional distribution and architecture of reservoir and nonreservoir bodies in a fluviodeltaic system. Hydrocarbon exploration and development activities, such as optimally locating seismic surveys and/or drilling locations, could be impacted if the wrong model is applied. As such, it is recommended that fluviodeltaic systems worldwide should be critically reexamined in light of the high-resolution sequence stratigraphic model presented herein.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".