MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404505493 · doi:10.1144/m61-2024-58

Chapter 7. Albertine Rift basin deltas

2024· article· en· W4404505493 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher J. Nicholas

Bibliographic record

VenueGeological Society London Memoirs · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRiftGeologyStructural basinPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the most obvious geomorphological features that can form at a coastline is a delta. In the Albertine Rift, at the long-axial shorelines of lakes away from rift-border faults at the basin flanks, and where there is a gentle, offshore topographic dip to the rift valley floor, then a long-axial delta system (LADS) can form. Low-level aerial photography demonstrates that these have a relatively high sediment discharge over a remarkably short period of time, prograding tens of metres in only a few years. This produces an elongate delta finger lobe, with associated characteristic geomorphological features, such as dextral and sinistral spits, barrier and mouth bars. Yet, no delta finger lobes are more than a few kilometres long, indicating that incremental movement along rift-bounding and intrabasinal faults change the dip of the rift valley floor and cause forced avulsion in rivers and rapid abandonment of a LADS. Together, these factors produce easily identifiable intervals within Pleistocene–Holocene rift-fill stratigraphy that display coarsening-up parasequence sets within an overall 3–5 m deltaic package. Typically, these will be stacked in the stratigraphy between recognizable marginal lacustrine sediments, such as sand berms and runnel lagoons.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0450.006

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeological Society London MemoirsSame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207