Depositional processes operating on the paleoproterozoic gowganda ice margin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glacial sedimentary rocks of the Huronian Supergroup crop out along the north shore of Lake Huron and were likely deposited on what is thought to have been a divergent \ncontinental margin (Fralick and Miall, 1981; 1989). The rocks of the Gowganda Formation record one of three glacial events preserved in the Supergroup and are therefore of interest for developing further glaciomarine models (Puffett, 1974) and furthering understanding of this early stage in Earth?s history. Data has been collected in five main study areas in an attempt to cover as much of the ancient continental margin as possible. The study areas include Espanola, Elliot Lake, Thessalon and Cobalt, Ontario and Marquette, Michigan. There are two glaciogenic formations in the Marquette area of Paleoproterozoic age, the Reany Creek Formation and the Enchantment Lake \nFormation. The Enchantment Lake Formation has been chronostratigraphically correlated to the Huronian Supergroup based on U-??Pb age determination on detrital zircon, 2317?6 Ma, and diagenetic xenotime, 2133?11 Ma (Vallini et al., 2006). As these formations are present in such close proximity to each other, and there are no Archean glacial events recorded in the rest of the Canadian Shield, it is reasonable to correlate them with the Gowganda Formation, the thickest and most commonly preserved of the three Huronian glacial events.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".