MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4387917221 · doi:10.4095/332153

Seismic expression of the Codroy Group in the St. George's Bay lowlands, Newfoundland and Labrador

2023· report· en· W4387917221 on OpenAlexaffabout
Paul Durling

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyGroup (periodic table)EvaporiteClastic rockBaySection (typography)Stratigraphic sectionPaleontologyBeddingWindsorSedimentary rockOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A composite stratigraphic section of the Codroy Group in the St. George's Bay lowlands was assembled from published stratigraphic sections and borehole data, in concert with published biostratigraphic data. The relative placement of stratigraphic sections in the composite section was guided by a form line contour map, which was constructed using bedding attitudes compiled from published geological maps. The composite section comprises a thick (~1000m), evaporite dominated, lower interval; a medial interval characterised by clastic, carbonate and evaporite rocks; and an upper clastic dominated interval. The lower evaporite interval correlates with Subzone A of the Windsor Group, the middle carbonate interval with Subzone B, and the upper interval with Windsor Subzones D and E. Average rock properties were assigned to the various strata in the composite section and a synthetic seismic trace was computed. The synthetic seismic trace provides insight into the nature and thickness of the Codroy Group imaged on seismic reflection data in the immediately adjacent offshore area beneath St. George's Bay.

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)0.001
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 score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological formations and processes→French-language works237,207→