YUKON EXPLORATION AND GEOLOGY 2003 129 Preliminary lithostratigraphy of the Laberge Group (Jurassic), south-central Yukon: Implications concerning the petroleum potential of the Whitehorse Trough
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Whitehorse Trough, a Mesozoic sedimentary basin in south-central Yukon that has potential for gas and oil, consists of the Lewes River Group (Triassic), the Laberge Group (Jurassic), and the Tantalus Formation (Jura-Cretaceous). The Laberge Group in the Carmacks (115I) and Laberge (105E) map areas is subdivided into four informal lithostratigraphic units: the Richthofen, Tanglefoot, Conglomerate and Nordenskiold formations. The Richthofen formation, distinguished by siltstone to very fine sandstone and mudstone couplets, is exposed in the southern part of the Laberge map area where it rests unconformably to conformably on the Lewes River Group and is unconformably and/or conformably overlain by the Tanglefoot formation. The Tanglefoot formation, distinguished by coal-bearing, interbedded sandstone and mudstone, is exposed in the northern part of the Laberge map area and the southern part of the Carmacks map area where it rests unconformably on the Lewes River Group, and is overlain by the Tantalus Formation. The Conglomerate (conglomerate) and Nordenskiold (dacite tuff) formations occur as minor units within the Tanglefoot formation. The Richthofen-Tanglefoot formation unconformity and/or conformity is a potential petroleum play in the central Whitehorse Trough, whereas the Lewes River Group-Tanglefoot formation unconformity is a
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.004 | 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".