Existence and Distribution of Basin-Wide Strike Slip Fault Systems in an Asymmetrical Back Arc Rift System: The Black Sea Basin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Black Sea Basin has been a focus of interest due to its economically promising hydrocarbon reserves and complex tectonic history. Several different theories were proposed to decipher its enigmatic basin formation and tectonic evolution processes.One important characteristic of the Black Sea Basin that makes it unique is its isolation from the world oceans, and global sea level changes for long periods during the geological time. This provides a good realm to correlate tectonic episodes with rapid sedimentation patterns in its thick sedimentary section. With the aim of modelling this sequence of events, we reviewed and reinterpreted previously proposed scenarios. We focus on the back-arc rifting and subsequent tectonic inversion that led the surrounding mountain belts to form. By reinterpreting 24 long-offset 2D seismic lines acquired by GWL in 2011, we propose a new structural framework for the Black Sea Basin.Our structural geology analyses show that in addition to basin-bounding normal faults and inversion tectonics, numerous flower structures occur in both the western and eastern Black Sea subbasins. These flower structures are typical indicators of strike-slip fault systems and in the Black sea Basin case, the orientation of these fault systems is roughly east-west. Our interpretations align with the hinge model that Stephenson and Schellart (Geological Society London Special Publications, 2010) proposed to explain the opening of the Black Sea Basin as one basin rather than the conventional interpretation of a two separate rifted basin configuration. The proposed tectonic framework sheds light on the geometry of the Black Sea Basin’s bounding faults, complex faulting and folding recognized in the sedimentary section, and complex ridge-depression geometry.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".