MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406691530 · doi:10.1017/9781108686631.019

Trapping Styles

2025· book-chapter· en· W4406691530 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiverse Musicological Studies
Canadian institutionsGeoscience BC
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrappingMaterials scienceEnvironmental scienceGeographyForestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter describes how structural and stratigraphic architectures involving reservoirs combined with seals represent hydrocarbon traps and control their structural, stratigraphic, or combined character in strike-slip and transform margin settings. It talks about their characteristics. Structural traps evolve with their controlling strike-slip faults that develop as not steady-state features in the continental lithosphere. The trap geometry develops in response to controlling mechanical stratigraphy and local stress field undergoing constant changes. Different structural traps in the same mature strike-slip fault zone may have been developed in different stages of its development. Older ones may have been modified during the younger stages of the strike-slip fault or subsequent event. Some structural traps can be associated with the strike-slip fault itself, others with its horse-tail structures, some with the region between the two interacting strike-slip faults, others with the tectonic setting hosting the strike-slip fault, modified by the interaction of the hosting setting with developing strike-slip fault. The environment where the strike-slip fault develops may have its own suite of pre-existing traps that get modified by the strike-slip-related deformation.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.235
Threshold uncertainty score0.786

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2350.077

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.105 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicDiverse Musicological StudiesFrench-language works237,207