MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7100427934

YUKON EXPLORATION AND GEOLOGY 2004 167

2015· article· en· W7100427934 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicInorganic Fluorides and Related Compounds
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCretaceousFluvialLithostratigraphyCarboniferousSwampVolcano
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extensive conglomeratic strata in the Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous Tantalus Formation were deposited in both shallow gravel-bed braided rivers, and deeper meandering gravel bed rivers. Overbank, marsh and swamp deposits, with potential to contain abundant terrestrial organic materials, are restricted to recessive intervals associated with small sandy and gravelly high-constructive river systems. Medium- to high-volatile bituminous and anthracitic coals in these intervals have limited potential as a source of additional gaseous hydrocarbons. Most of the conglomerates have a high fracture density, which would make them good reservoirs for coal-bed methane in settings where the Tantalus Formation lies beneath a seal of younger volcanic strata. Strata of the Late Norian Mandanna member of the Aksala formation near Takhini Hotsprings do not contain fluvial strata: laminated, bioturbated, intraclast-bearing red sandstones were deposited in an intertidal setting, and may have lost most of their organic material prior to burial. RÉSUMÉ D’importantes strates conglomératiques de la Formation de Tantalus datant du Jurassique tardif au Crétacé précoce se sont déposées à la fois dans des cours d’eau anostomosés peu profonds et dans

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInorganic Fluorides and Related CompoundsFrench-language works237,207