MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392399891 · doi:10.4095/332508

Summary of the Statherian-Calymmian paleogeography of northwestern Laurentia

2024· report· en· W4392399891 on OpenAlexaffabout
R H Rainbird, W J Davis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaurentiaPalaeogeographyGeologyPaleontologyOrdovician

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ca. 1.75 to 1.27 Ga Hornby Bay intracontinental basin, in northwestern Canada, includes the Big Bear, Mountain Lake, and Dismal Lakes groups. This paper investigates the original depositional environments, paleogeography, and architecture of these groups and how they correlate in time and space. The Big Bear group comprises mainly immature clastic rocks deposited by high-energy rivers, the overlying Mountain Lake group was deposited by westerly flowing rivers over a much broader region, and, following tectonic uplift and erosion, basal clastic rocks of the Dismal Lakes Group were deposited in fluvial and then shallow-marine to paralic environments. Detrital zircon geochronology of sandstone units from the Mountain Lake group of Hornby Bay Basin and Wernecke Supergroup in the Wernecke Mountains supports their correlation and the conclusion that they represent the terrestrial and marine components, respectively, of a west-facing, passive-margin clastic wedge that evolved to a stable carbonate platform. These relationships imply further westward extension of a continental drainage system.

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 score0.516
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.196 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological Studies and Exploration→French-language works237,207→