MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393521002 · doi:10.1017/s0016756824000050

Disruption and localization of sediment pathways by continental extension: Detrital-zircon provenance change from upper Triassic to lower Jurassic in the northern Sverdrup Basin, Nunavut

2023· article· en· W4393521002 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Derrick Midwinter, Thomas Hadlari, Keith Dewing, W. A. Matthews

Bibliographic record

VenueGeological Magazine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryGeological Survey of Canada
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsSverdrupGeologyProvenanceZirconStructural basinSedimentPaleontologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Constraints on the tectonic setting of the upper Triassic to lower Jurassic in the Sverdrup Basin can be elucidated from detrital-zircon U-Pb ages. During the Triassic, there was a dual provenance system into sedimentary basins along the western and northern margins of Laurentia. One of the sediment sources was from an extra-basinal igneous source of Permian-Triassic zircon while the other source was recycled sediment eroded from older sedimentary basins. The Heiberg Formation/Group was deposited during a period of significant siliciclastic sedimentation into the basin from the upper Triassic to the lower Jurassic and comprises three members: Romulus, Fosheim and Remus. Previous work has interpreted that the Carboniferous-Permian-Triassic detrital zircon had stopped reaching the northern part of the Sverdrup Basin by deposition of the upper Heiberg Formation (lower Jurassic). New detrital-zircon age analyses from samples along the northern part of the basin spanning different horizons in the Heiberg Formation show that the typical extra-basinal signature, with abundant Carboniferous-Permian-Triassic ages, was no longer recorded during the initial deposition of the Fosheim Member during the latest Triassic. Previously published basin analysis from the Sverdrup Basin interprets syn-Jurassic extensional faults and so we relate the provenance change to the onset of extension. It is interpreted that the Sverdrup Basin transitioned from a basin that received sediment from a northern extra-basinal igneous source during deposition of the Romulus Member to an extensional basin by the deposition of the Fosheim Member in the latest Triassic, as the northern sediment source was interrupted by intervening extensional basins of the proto-Amerasia Basin.

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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeological MagazineSame topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207