MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3170344908 · doi:10.1130/g48771.1

Labyrinth patterns in Magadi (Kenya) cherts: Evidence for early formation from siliceous gels

2021· article· en· W3170344908 on OpenAlexaff
Kennie Leet, Tim K. Lowenstein, Robin W. Renaut, R. Bernhart Owen, Andrew S. Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenueGeology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetrographyGeologyThin sectionSedimentary rockArcheanGeochemistryPaleontologyMineralogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sedimentary cherts, with well-preserved microfossils, are known from the Archean to the present, yet their origins remain poorly understood. Lake Magadi, Kenya, has been used as a modern analog system for understanding the origins of nonbiogenic chert. We present evidence for synsedimentary formation of Magadi cherts directly from siliceous gels. Petrographic thin-section analysis and field-emission scanning electron microscopy of cherts from cores drilled in Lake Magadi during the Hominin Sites and Paleolakes Drilling Project in 2014 led to the discovery of two-dimensional branching “labyrinth patterns” in chert, which are a type of fractal “squeeze” pattern formed at air-liquid interfaces. Labyrinth patterns preserved in chert from Lake Magadi cores indicate invasion of air along planes in dewatering gels. These patterns support the precipitation of silica gels in the saline-alkaline Lake Magadi system and syndepositional drying of gels in contact with air as part of chert formation. Recognizing cherts as syndepositional has been critical for our use of them for U-Th dating. Identification of labyrinth patterns in ancient cherts can provide a better understanding of paleoenvironmental and geochemical conditions in the past.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeologySame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207