Resolving lithostratigraphic complexities in the Crayfish Group, Otway Basin using chemostratigraphy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Otway Basin comprises a significant part of the eastern Australian Southern Rift System, a divergent passive continental margin formed during the Cretaceous separation of the Australian and Antarctic continents. Early rifting activity resulted in the development of many half grabens within the Otway Basin, which are largely infilled by sediments of the Casterton Formation and Crayfish Group. Despite over 20 years of exploration and hydrocarbon production from these units however, their lithostratigraphic characterisation and nomenclature remain ambiguous, with structural complexity and prevalent lateral facies changes leading to confusion in their basin-wide correlation. Deposited in a largely non-marine, fluvial/lacustrine environment, repeating cycles of sandstones and shales of the Crayfish Group can be difficult to resolve using petrology, palynology and wireline log data. The use of chemostratigraphy is favoured as an investigative tool in this situation since changes in provenance, lithic composition, facies, weathering and diagenesis are reflected in the mineralogy of the sediments, resulting in variations in their inorganic geochemistry. Uniform sedimentary successions can thus potentially be differentiated into unique sequences and packages based on their characteristic geochemistry, aiding in the resolution of complex structural relationships and facies changes. In this study, we present new inorganic geochemistry data for four key wells in the South Australian (SA) Penola Trough and interpret the geochemistry data consistent with, and building on, the chemostratigraphic schema of Forbes et al. to demonstrate its utility and robustness. We then undertake inter-well wireline log correlations across the SA Penola Trough using the wells with chemostratigraphic data as controls.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".