MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3200758040 · doi:10.4095/328813

A summary of the Paleozoic biostratigraphy and reexamination of palynology samples from the 9590 to 10 000 ft. (2923.03048.0 m) interval of the Gannet O-54 well, Grand Banks of Newfoundland

2021· report· en· W3200758040 on OpenAlexaffabout
N Bingham-Koslowski, M. Miller

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaleozoicPalynologyBiostratigraphyPaleontologyGeologyInterval (graph theory)BiologyPollenEcologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Five unoxidized palynological (kerogen) slides from the lowermost section of the Gannet O-54 well (part of the Geological Survey of Canada - Atlantic's archived slide collection) were re-analyzed with the hope of providing refined ages for this mainly indeterminate interval: slides P3580-07 (9590'/2923.0 m), P3581-07 (9690'/2953.5 m), P3582-07 (9790'/2984.0 m), P3583-07 (9890'/3014.5 m), and P3584-07 (10 000'/3048.0 m). Thermal alteration indices (TAIs) were also measured where possible. Three of the slides are barren (P3581-07, P3583-07, and P3584-07). One slide (P3582-07) contains two spores: Middle to Late Devonian Ancyrospora sp. with a TAI value of 6+ and an indeterminate spore with a TAI value of 5+. Both spores are interpreted as caved and thus not useful in determining age. Only one slide, P3580-07 (9590'/2923.0 m), yields in situ, identifiable spores, indicating a Middle to Late Devonian age, which is consistent with previously published palynological data for Gannet O-54.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score0.942

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological Studies and Exploration→French-language works237,207→