MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205410234 · doi:10.1016/j.coal.2021.103865

Role of zooclasts in the kerogen type and hydrocarbon potential of the lower Paleozoic Alum Shale

2021· article· en· W3205410234 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaowei Zheng, Hamed Sanei, Niels H. Schovsbo, Qingyong Luo, Jia Wu, Ningning Zhong, Jennifer M. Galloway, Fariborz Goodarzi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Coal Geology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaGeological Survey of Canada
FundersDanish Hydrocarbon Research and Technology Centre, Technical University of DenmarkAarhus Institute of Advanced Studies, Aarhus UniversitetNationale Geologiske Undersøgelser for Danmark og GrønlandAarhus Universitets ForskningsfondChina Scholarship CouncilScience Foundation of China University of Petroleum, BeijingChina University of Petroleum, BeijingEuropean CommissionAarhus Universitet
KeywordsKerogenOil shalePaleozoicGeologyAlumHydrocarbonSedimentary rockGeochemistryShale gasPaleontologySource rockChemistryStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the role of zooclasts in the bulk organic matter composition, kerogen type, and hydrocarbon generation potential of the lower Paleozoic marine Alum shale in Baltoscandia, northwestern Europe. The results show that graptolite periderm is composed of non-granular cuticles and granular filling. The graptolite cuticle is non-fluorescing and has a well-polishing measurable surface, while the graptolite granular fraction is semi-translucent and has brownish fluorescence, suggesting remaining hydrocarbon generation potential. The graptolite granular fraction shows similar optical characteristics to fluorescing diagenetic solid bitumen. Both the graptolite granular fraction and diagenetic solid bitumen have low intensity yellow to brown fluorescence and contribute to generative potential (Rock-Eval S2). The sum of semi-quantitative zooclastic cuticle (non-granular graptolite cuticle, chitinozoan cuticle, and vitrinite-like) and diagenetic solid bitumen content, obtained from maceral point-counting, correlates with the non-generative organic carbon content. Enrichment of zooclastic cuticle in the samples is displayed as enrichment of inert organic carbon, and hence bulk geochemical kerogen of type III. This refractory carbon-rich maceral enrichment results represents autochthonous ‘refractory organic carbon dilution’ and will lead to Hydrocarbon Index (HI) underestimation. Confined hydrous pyrolysis was used to compare the hydrocarbon generation process of a zooclastic cuticle-lean sample (0.2 vol%) and a zooclastic cuticle-rich (1.6 vol%) sample. Results indicate that there are four stages of hydrocarbon generation in the artificial maturation of unconventional source rock of the Alum Shale. The zooclastic cuticle-lean sample has higher hydrocarbon generation potential and more oil-prone than the zooclastic cuticle-rich sample, which is gas-prone and generates more CO2. This difference in hydrocarbon generation is attributed to differences in the organic constituent composition.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations24
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Coal GeologySame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207