NEW BIOSTRATIGRAPHIC AND CHRONOSTRATIGRAPHIC DATA FROM THE SAUTOU FORMATION AND ADJACENT STRATA (CAMBRIAN, GIVONNE INLIER, REVIN GROUP, NORTHERN FRANCE) AND SOME LITHOSTRATIGRAPHIC AND TECTONIC IMPLICATIONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the western part of the Givonne Inlier, the “Falizette” and the “Claire-Terne de la Borne” rivers exhibit sections described as belonging, in ascending order, to the La Chapelle (Rv2), Illy (Rv3) and Sautou (Rv4) Formations. The “Falizette” section yielded acritarchs of zone 4 (locally 4b) similar to assemblages observed earlier (Vanguestaine, 1978) in the “Givonne” and “ Hatrelle” valleys of the Givonne Inlier. In the “Terne de la Borne” section, the strata described as belonging to the Illy Formation and most part of the Sautou Formation, the latter in its type locality, provided acritarchs of zone 2 (and possibly 1) and do not correlate therefore with the Rv3 and the Rv4 of the Rocroi Inlier but with Rv2 (and possibly Rv1) of the same area. This correlation is reinforced by the observation in the sequence of a roo? ng slate seam, previously undescribed, a possible equivalent of the Peureux Member, characterizing the upper part of Rv1 in the Rocroi Inlier. Besides specimens pointing to an acritarch biozone 2 assemblage, the richest sample of the Sautou Formation also yielded rare examples of acritarch species which have not previously been recorded in Belgium or the surrounding areas. They are Adara alea, Celtiberium geminum, possibly Eliasum llaniscum, Multiplicisphaeridium martae and Retisphaeridium postae. The probable metazoan Ceratophyton vernicosum has also been observed. Compared to the well dated Newfoundland Cambrian succession, acritarch biozones 2 assemblages indicates a mid Middle Cambrian age. This new chronostratigraphic result not only allows a better calibration of the Belgian acritarch zonation with respect to the acritarch and trilobite international zonations but also con? rms our interpretation of the lithostratigraphic succession.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".