MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4282946679 · doi:10.18814/epiiugs/2022/022012

The Standard Auxiliary Boundary Stratotype: a proposed replacement for the Auxiliary Stratotype Point in supporting a Global boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP)

2022· article· en· W4282946679 on OpenAlexafffund
Martin J. Head, Marie‐Pierre Aubry, Werner E. Piller, Mike Walker

Bibliographic record

VenueEpisodes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGlobal Boundary Stratotype Section and PointStratotypeSection (typography)Boundary (topology)Point (geometry)GeologyPaleontologyGeometryComputer scienceMathematicsStage (stratigraphy)Mathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Auxiliary boundary stratotypes have unquestionable value in extending the knowledge of a Global boundary Stratotype Section and Point (GSSP) between continents, biogeographic provinces, climatic zones, depositional facies and preservational states. Two kinds of such stratotypes are in use, the Auxiliary Stratotype Point and the Auxiliary Stratotype Section, although only the Auxiliary Stratotype Point is recognised by the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS). The Standard Auxiliary Boundary Stratotype, which is based on the Auxiliary Stratotype Section, is proposed here as a formal replacement for the Auxiliary Stratotype Point. As such, it would provide a detailed complementary expression of the boundary interval without the designation of a specific point -no such points can replicate the precise level defined by a GSSP either conceptually or in practice. We recommend that requirements for future Standard Auxiliary Boundary Stratotypes broadly follow ICS guidelines for GSSPs but be applied with greater flexibility. Past practice reveals inconsistency in the protocols used for approving such auxiliary boundary stratotypes. We propose that in future they require approval by the respective ICS subcommission. More than one Standard Auxiliary Boundary Stratotype may support a single GSSP but restraint should be exercised in approving them, and each will always be subordinate to the GSSP itself.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.005

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpisodesSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207