MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291920450 · doi:10.4095/321853

Overview of the stratigraphy, paleoclimate, and paleoceanography of the Labrador-Baffin Seaway

2022· report· en· W4291920450 on OpenAlexaffabout
L T Dafoe, G L Williams, K Dickie, Ulrik Gregersen, Paul Cornils Knutz, G Dam, G K Pedersen, H Nøhr-Hansen, James W. Haggart, Kevin DesRoches

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyPaleontologySeafloor spreadingProgradationCretaceousUnconformityPaleogenePaleoceanographyStratigraphyRiftOceanographyStructural basinTectonicsSedimentary depositional environment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The tectonic evolution of the Labrador-Baffin Seaway began with Early Cretaceous extension between Greenland and North America, resulting in the development of basins infilled with nonmarine and shallow-marine clastic strata. The Late Cretaceous was a time of continued rifting and local subsidence, with deposition of widespread deeper water marine mud and localized sand deposits. Seafloor spreading began in the south in the Latest Cretaceous and propagated throughout the seaway by the Early Paleocene. Regional seafloor spreading coincided with the onset of significant volcanism in the Davis Strait to central West Greenland region, as well as a regional regression. A change in the spreading direction around the Paleocene- Eocene boundary, was accompanied by strike-slip motion in the Davis Strait and Baffin Bay, deformation and basin inversion, and development of regional unconformities. After seafloor spreading ceased in the late Eocene, the seaway was filled by upper Paleogene to Recent sediments, with clinoform progradation building the modern-day shelves.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207