MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4220868153 · doi:10.1017/9781009028882

Local and Global Controls on Carbon Isotope Chemostratigraphy

2022· book· en· W4220868153 on OpenAlexaff
Anne‐Sofie C. Ahm, Jon M. Husson

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2022
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemostratigraphyCarbon cycleIsotopes of carbonCarbonateDiagenesisGeologyCarbon fibersEarth scienceSeawaterIsotope geochemistrySedimentary rockStable isotope ratioCarbon sinkGeochemistryPaleontologyIsotopeTotal organic carbonOceanographyClimate changeEnvironmental chemistryChemistryMaterials scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over million-year timescales, the geologic cycling of carbon controls long-term climate and the oxidation of Earth's surface. Inferences about the carbon cycle can be made from time series of carbon isotopic ratios measured from sedimentary rocks. The foundational assumption for carbon isotope chemostratigraphy is that carbon isotope values reflect dissolved inorganic carbon in a well-mixed ocean in equilibrium with the atmosphere. However, when applied to shallow-water platform environments, where most ancient carbonates preserved in the geological record formed, recent research has documented the importance of considering both local variability in surface water chemistry and diagenesis. These findings demonstrate that carbon isotope chemostratigraphy of platform carbonate rarely represent the average carbonate sink or directly records changes in the composition of global seawater. Understanding what causes local variability in shallow-water settings, and what this variability might reveal about global boundary conditions, are vital questions for the next generation of carbon isotope chemostratigraphers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooks→Same topicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research→French-language works237,207→