MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7047739636

Integrated Ocean Drilling Program Expedition 342 Preliminary Report. Paleogene Newfoundland Sediment Drifts, 1 June–30 July 2012

2012· book· en· W7047739636 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueePrints Soton (University of Southampton) · 2012
Typebook
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaleogeneSedimentary rockDeposition (geology)Deep seaDrillingSedimentCarbonate compensation depthOcean currentWater massForaminifera
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrated Ocean Drilling Program Expedition 342 was designed to recover Paleogene sedimentary sequences with unusually high deposition rates across a wide range of water depths (Sites U1403–U1411). The drilling area is positioned to capture sedimentary and geochemical records of ocean chemistry and overturning circulation beneath the flow of the Deep Western Boundary Current in the northwest Atlantic Ocean. In addition, two operational days were dedicated to a sea trial of the Motion Decoupled Hydraulic Delivery System developmental tool (Site U1402). The expedition was primarily targeted at reconstructing the Paleogene carbonate compensation depth (CCD) in the North Atlantic for reference to recently obtained high-fidelity records of the CCD in the equatorial Pacific. The site located in the deepest water (Site U1403) was at a paleodepth of ~4.5 km 50 m.y. ago, whereas the site located in the shallowest water (Site U1408) can be backtracked to a paleodepth of 2.5km at the same time. The combination of sites yields a record of the history of CCD change over a 2km depth range from the ocean abyss to middle range water depths. Notable findings include the discovery of intermittent calcareous sediments in the Cretaceous, Paleocene, and early to middle Eocene at 4.5 km paleodepth, suggesting a deep Atlantic CCD during these times. We find evidence of carbonate deposition events following the Cretaceous/Paleogene (K/Pg) boundary mass extinction, the Paleocene/Eocene Thermal Maximum, and the Eocene–Oligocene transition. These deposition events may reflect the rebalancing of ocean alkalinity after mass extinctions or abrupt global climate change. Intervals during which the CCD appears to have been markedly shallow in the North Atlantic include the Early Eocene Climatic Optimum, the late Eocene, and the middle Oligocene. A second major objective of Expedition 342 was to recover clay-rich sequences with well-preserved microfossils and high rates of accumulation in comparison to the modest rates of accumulation (~0.5–1 cm/k.y. in the Paleogene) typically encountered at pelagic sites. As anticipated, Expedition 342 recovered sequences with sedimentation rates of as much as 10 cm/k.y.—high enough to enable studies of the dynamics of past abrupt climate change, including both transitions into “greenhouse” and “icehouse” climate states, the full magnitudes of hyperthermal events, and rates of change in the CCD. We find that the thickest central parts of the various sediment drifts typically record similar depositional packages to those recovered in the thin “noses” and “tails” of these drifts, but these central parts are often massively expanded with clay, especially near the CCD. Times of rapid accumulation of drift deposits include the early Eocene to late middle Eocene, the late Eocene to early Oligocene, the late Oligocene and early Miocene, the later Miocene to probable late Pliocene, and the Pleistocene. Widespread hiatuses are present near the Paleocene/Eocene boundary into the middle early Eocene and the middle Oligocene. The Eocene/Oligocene boundary is a period of slow sedimentation at most sites but is expanded at Site U1411. A marked change in the geometry of drift formation is observed in the ?late Pliocene, as has been observed in drift deposits elsewhere.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.006

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 head0.228
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueePrints Soton (University of Southampton)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207