MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095158488 · doi:10.1130/abs/2020am-355899

GEOCHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF UTICA SHALE PLAY USING XRF-BASED CHEMOSTRATIGRAPHY IN OHIO

2020· article· en· W3095158488 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAbstracts with programs - Geological Society of America · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicHeavy Metals in Plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemostratigraphyCharacterization (materials science)GeologyOil shaleGeochemistryMineralogyPaleontologyMaterials scienceChemistryEnvironmental chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Utica shale is an extensive gas shale play within the Appalachian Basin, expanding from Quebec through New York, into Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Ohio. Currently a target for gas exploration, it is also the source rock for much of the Paleozoic reservoirs throughout the basin. However, the Utica-Point Pleasant lithology varies significantly across the Appalachian Basin which can make it challenging to characterize. The Utica shale Play consists of the Trenton/Lexington Limestones, Point Pleasant Formation and Utica shale. The Point Pleasant Formation and Utica shale are often grouped together, especially in Ohio because they are difficult to visually distinguish from each other and their contact is not always marked by a change in log values. Here we show that chemostratigraphy reflects changes in depositional and facies characteristics of the Utica shale and Point Pleasant Formation. For this study, two cores were analyzed using a handheld x-ray fluorescence (HH-XRF) spectrometer along with core descriptions, x-ray diffraction (XRD) and total organic carbon (TOC) data to interpret the depositional environment. Hierarchical clustering technique was used to identify five chemofacies which reflect the geochemical variability present in both cores. Six chemozones were identified and correlated using the chemofacies coupled with stratigraphic plots of selected major elements, trace metals and TOC. Detrital influx analysis revealed that the Utica-Point Pleasant interval in both cores were deposited in different water depths resulting in different amounts of terrigenous input. Paleoredox conditions revealed the Farley core was deposited in oxygenated bottom waters which account for the depletion of trace metals throughout the core. In the Tracker core, analysis showed that bottom-water conditions at the time of deposition varied between anoxic and euxinic. The Tracker core shares similar bottom-water conditions present in the Sebree Trough in Kentucky and is believed to have been deposited in an extension of the trough into northeast Ohio. The Farley core appears to have been deposited outside this trough and likely in the Utica-Point Pleasant basin. Overall the study supports the existence of different depocenters across the area with different conditions at the time of deposition.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.224 · 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