Current Ripples DOI: 10.2110/jsr.2012.18 FORCED REGRESSIVE TIDAL FLATS: RESPONSE TO FALLING SEA LEVEL IN TIDE- DOMINATED SETTINGS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: During forced regression, the coastline advances seaward irrespective of sediment supply and relocates to a topographically lower position. Forced-regressive deposits are a component of the falling-stage systems tract. They are recognized by a basal unconformity which records erosion during the seaward facies shift, and are in turn capped by another unconformity due to subaerial exposure or wave ravinement during subsequent transgression. In wave-dominated settings, the basal ‘‘regressive surface of marine erosion’ ’ is a scoured surface cut by wave action, because erosion is needed to maintain the seaward-sloping bathymetric profile in equilibrium with the wave energy. The response to falling sea level in tide-dominated settings has not been as thoroughly discussed. The stratal architecture of the Lower Cambrian Gog Group of the southern Canadian Rocky Mountains reveals a new mechanism for the formation of this surface landward of the lever point of balance between sedimentation and erosion in the subtidal environment. Subtidal parasequences of the Lake O’Hara Member are typically composed of thin-bedded mudstone and ripple cross-laminated sandstone, followed by Skolithos pipe rock and thin- to medium-bedded cross-stratified sandstone overlain by thick-bedded cross-stratified sandstone. However, at the top of the Lake O’Hara Member, an erosional surface truncates a pipe-rock interval and the expected capping cross-stratified sandstones are absent. Overlying this surface, the Lake Oesa Member comprises tidal-flat deposits composed mainly of thinly interbedded mudstone and sandstone. This jump in facies at the erosional surface can be explained as a response to a fall in sea level. As the shoreline is forced to regress, the laterally continuous tidal flats advance and the pre-existing shallow-subtidal compound dunes
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.140 | 0.038 |
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".