MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319056888 · doi:10.1306/10252221113

Sequence stratigraphic architecture of the Lower Triassic Montney Formation, northeastern British Columbia, Canada

2023· article· en· W4319056888 on OpenAlexaffabout
Greg M. Baniak, Thomas F. Moslow, Stavros Michailides, Matthew G. Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueAAPG Bulletin · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoPenn West Exploration (Canada)Petro-Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyPaleontologySequence (biology)ArchitectureArchaeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The Lower Triassic Montney Formation in western Canada is the third largest unconventional natural gas deposit globally. The project area lies at the basinward limit of subsurface deposition and exhibits a wide degree of heterogeneity. Four stratigraphic sequences bounded by either coplanar sequence boundary–flooding surfaces or their correlative conformities are recognized in the Montney and overlying Sunset Prairie Formation and are matched to global Triassic substages. These sequences and substages include sequence 1 (Griesbachian–Dienerian, lower Montney), sequence 2 (Smithian, middle Montney), sequence 3 (Spathian, upper Montney), and sequence 4 (Anisian, Sunset Prairie). Sequence 1 consists of a retrogradational to aggradational set of distal ramp parasequences. Sequence 2 is composed of prograding mixed siliciclastic-carbonate ramp parasequences. Sequence 3 is made up of two distinct successions. The lower interval reflects deposition in offshore environments during onlap, whereas the overlying interval is an offlapping set of shoreface parasequences. Sequence 4 was deposited within an offshore to lower shoreface setting. With petrophysical logs, subsurface core, and biostratigraphic data, higher-resolution parasequences may be identified within each of these four sequences. Sequence 1 can be further subdivided into three parasequence sets (LmA–LmC) and one separate parasequence (LmD), sequence 2 into four parasequence sets (MmA–MmD) and one separate parasequence (MmE), sequence 3 into five parasequence sets (Um1–UmC), and sequence 4 into one large parasequence unit (Am1). Understanding these different parasequences and their spatial distribution is critical when considering variations in static reservoir properties and their relation to dynamic well performance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.735

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.171 · 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.

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAAPG BulletinSame topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of FossilsFrench-language works237,207