A micromorphological perspective on the Neoproterozoic Smalfjord and Mortensnes Formation diamictites—Varangerfjord, Norway
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many Neoproterozoic diamictites are glacial in origin (Young, G.M. 2018. Precambrian glacial deposits: their origin, tectonic setting, and key role in Earth evolution. In Past glacial environments. 2nd ed. Edited by J. Menzies, and J.J.M. van der Meer. Elsevier. Chapter 2, pp. 17–45. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-100524-8.00001-4). However, many are thought to be nonglacial mass movement deposits. Discussion on the nature of Neoproterozoic climate change focuses on the controversial origin of diamictite-bearing strata and the criteria to determine the extent and nature, or not, of glacial influence on their deposition. At the macroscale, sediments (diamictites) deposited beneath palaeo-ice masses or debris flows are massive, lack few visible signs of stratification, or deformation signatures. Microscopic investigations have resulted in specific sedimentary structures being identified, indicative of stress during glacial deposition, or developed in transit within mass movements. Case examples derived from the Neoproterozoic in Varanger, Norway have been investigated that provide strain signatures of “unique sequences” of microstructures. Micromorphology, relatively new to Precambrian research, can deliver far greater detail on the depositional and deformation histories recorded by these diamictites than obtained from macroscale studies alone. The technique provides evidence of composite deformation histories of potential glacigenic and nonglacigenic sequences. Many microstructures can be observed in most diamictites. It can be demonstrated that diamictites, both glacigenic and non-glacigenic, contain most of these microstructures in varying levels of abundancy and can be separated on specific “sets” of summative structures present. At Varanger, 12 samples were analyzed for thin sectioning. As illustrative of the thin sections as a whole, 6 are presented here that offer a microscale perspective on the diamictites from this area and establish that both the Smalfjord and Mortensnes Formation diamictites are of glacial terrestrial or subaqueous origin.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".