Restoration and Balancing of a Cross Section of the Mt. Crandell Duplex, Waterton National Park, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cross-section balancing provides a useful tool for checking the potential viability of structural interpretations through complexly deformed terranes. Balanced cross sections contain structures that are similar to those observed in outcrop or on seismic profiles in the area, that can be restored to a realistic pre-deformational configuration of faults and undeformed strata where areas are preserved between the deformed and restored states, and whose development from the undeformed state can be described in a kinematically reasonable sequence. Quick-look inspection of cross sections greatly facilitates the balancing process by comparing corresponding hanging wall and footwall features (particularly focusing on ramps and flats) to identify areas in a cross section that may contain balancing issues. The well-known Boyer and Elliott (1982) cross section through the Mt. Crandell duplex in Waterton National Park in Alberta, Canada and its accompanying restoration have long served as a classic example of a balanced cross section. We carefully examined the section and its restoration using quick-look techniques, and noted several structures that had substantially changed their shape between the deformed and restored states, had ramp-flat mismatches between the hanging wall and footwall, and/or had significant area changes between the deformed and restored states. Using cross-section restoration software, we not only quantified differences between their deformed-state and restored-state cross sections, but we also rigorously restored their original section. Specifically, we identified differences where restored layer areas ranged from 18.3% to 186% of the areas of their deformed counterparts, with some layers missing or incomplete. In addition, the computerized restoration revealed multiple issues with ramp-flat geometries that produced substantial gaps and overlaps not reflected in the original restoration. Based on careful examination of these problematic areas, we are currently working on refining the Boyer and Elliott (1982) deformed-state cross section to address these issues.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".