MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307169220 · doi:10.1111/bre.12728

Stratigraphic record of continental breakup, offshore NW Australia—Discussion

2022· article· en· W4307169220 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Tiago M. Alves, Marcos Fetter, Cathy J. Busby, Tiago Cunha, Nathália H. Mattos

Bibliographic record

VenueBasin Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geophysical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsGeologyUnconformityPaleontologyContinental marginContinental shelfContinental crustRiftBreakupSubmarine pipelineTectonicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Reeve et al. (2022) address the stratigraphic record of continental breakup by focusing on a set of stratigraphic unconformities from a proximal sector of the NW Australian continental margin, inboard from the Exmouth Plateau. They suggest that such unconformities can potentially document a well‐defined three‐stage process: end of the syn‐rift phase, formation of a wide continent‐ocean transition zone (COTZ) and generation of ‘true’ Penrose‐type oceanic crust. We counterargue that continental breakup is a protracted event that can only be understood via seismic‐ and chronostratigraphic correlations of strata, and their composing sequences, across and along rifted margins. Tying proximal stratigraphic unconformities to magnetic anomalies outboard from the study area in Reeve et al. (2022) is open to question. In parallel, we suggest that age resolutions of ca. 1 Ma are not achievable using the micropaleontological data presented in Reeve et al. (2022), with an important reworking of microfossil assemblages potentially occurring during the erosional process forming local and regional unconformities. Our discussion addresses these points in more detail.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBasin ResearchSame topicGeological and Geophysical StudiesFrench-language works237,207