Sea floor bedforms and their influence on slope accommodation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In deep-water settings, the accommodation space for sediment transported by turbidity flows relates to the difference between the elevation of the depositional surface and its equilibrium profile. As a consequence, accommodation space creation, or disruption, may depend from changes in the physiography of the receiving basin, or changes in the flow properties. In topographically complex slopes, such where salt-withdrawal intra-slope basins occur, three different types of accommodation space have been recognized. Among other parameters, the ratio between flow thickness and depth of the intra-slope basin controls the partial, or full, ponding of the sediment in suspension, and consequently, the lithology distribution within the deposit. On a smaller spatial scale, the behavior of turbidity flows is affected by the topography of the sea floor. Indeed, the presence of large-wavelength bedforms may generate local topographic low compared to the adjacent sea floor that may trap part of the sediment carried by sediment-laden flows, such as turbidity flows or bottom currents. With a beautiful example from the offshore Brazil, we show how ponded lobes accumulate on the convex-up stoss side of pre-existing sea floor bedforms and how the three-dimensional topography of the sea floor controls the flow behavior and the deposition farther downslope. In detail, using 3D seismic data and attributes we demonstrate that the stoss side of the bedform traps the coarse-grained fraction of turbidity currents flowing downslope, while the fine-grained cloud spills over its crest. Further studies are necessary to fully understand the behavior of sediment-laden flows on a complex sea floor topography, the preservation potential of such deposits and the role of stoss accommodation in the evolution of deep-water depositional systems.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".