Lower Miocene carbonate platforms of the Falcón Basin (NW Venezuela) compared to the offshore Perla Field reservoir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on field data collected in the northern and southern Falcón Basin (Venezuela), this paper presents a comprehensive monograph that reports on the age and sedimentary evolution of the San Luis and Churuguara formations. It integrates platform-to-basin depositional models through facies distribution and stratal architecture, a palaeogeographic reconstruction, larger foraminifera biostratigraphy, sequence stratigraphy, and the evaluation of the accommodation history. An additional aim is to compare these onshore mixed carbonate-siliciclastic systems with the Oligo-Miocene subsurface carbonate reservoir of Perla in offshore Gulf of Venezuela, considered the largest gas discovery ever in Latin America. The carbonate platforms studied formed as a result of a secondorder transgressive event, and corresponded to distally steepened or undifferentiated ramps dominated by coralline algae and larger foraminifera. The presence of Miosorites americanus and Annulosorites spiralis dates the San Luis and Churuguara formations to the Early Miocene. The miogypsinid associations identified further distinguish between the Aquitanian and Burdigalian stages. The San Luis and Churuguara platforms exhibit a general aggradational trend, while the Perla carbonates have been interpreted as a retrogradational unit. Thirdorder T-R sequences interpreted from these successions were mainly influenced by differential tectonic subsidence. Additionally, major regional regressive events in the Falcón Basin and Perla Field coincide with global glaciations, highlighting the influence of eustatic changes. However, the Perla reservoir exhibits significant differences in thickness, spatial extent and sedimentary architecture compared to the onshore equivalents. The differences arise from variations in tectonic and palaeotopographic settings, accommodation and sedimentation rates and influence of adjacent siliciclastic systems. As a result, predicting the sedimentary architecture of carbonate reservoirs in this region using a generalized depositional model has proven to be challenging.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".