T129 Recent Developments in Cyclostratigraphy

Monday, 23 October 2017
1:30 PM - 5:30 PM
Room 611

REPRODUCIBILITY IN CYCLOSTRATIGRAPHY: INITIATING AN INTERCOMPARISON PROJECT

Paper number: T129-14
Program: Technical Sessions
Time: 5:00 PM – 5:15 PM

Authors

Abstract

The study of astronomical climate forcing and the application of cyclostratigraphy have experienced a spectacular growth over the last decades. In the field of cyclostratigraphy a broad range in methodological approaches exist. However, comparative study between the different approaches is lacking. Different cases demand different approaches, but with the growing importance of the field, questions arise about reproducibility, uncertainties and standardization of results. The radioisotopic dating community, in particular, has done far-reaching efforts to improve reproducibility and intercomparison of radioisotopic dates and their errors. To satisfy this need in cyclostratigraphy, we initiate a comparable framework for the community. The aims are to investigate and quantify reproducibility of, and uncertainties related to cyclostratigraphic studies and to provide a platform to discuss the merits and pitfalls of different methodologies, and their applicabilities.

We ask the feedback from the community on how to further design this comparative framework in a useful, meaningful and productive manner. In parallel, we would like to discuss how reproducibility should be tested and what uncertainties should stand for in cyclostratigraphy. On the other hand, we intend to trigger interest for a cyclostratigraphic intercomparison project. The intercomparison project will initially be structured around several “test scenarios”, which are signals to be analyzed by participants that feature state-of-the-art challenges in time-series analysis of geologic signals. All participants would be free to determine their method of choice. A handful of criterions will be required for an outcome to be comparable. Participants will be solicited to submit and/or present and describe their solutions to one or several of the “test scenarios” at a common event (e.g. workshop). The lessons learned from the comparison could be reported in a review paper.

The aim is not to rank the different methods according to their merits, but to get insight into which specific methods are most suitable for which specific problems, and obtain more information on different sources of uncertainty. As this project should be supported by the broader cyclostratigraphic community, we open the floor for suggestions, ideas and practical remarks.

Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs. Vol. 49, No. 6

doi: 10.1130/abs/2017AM-295937

© Copyright 2017 The Geological Society of America (GSA), all rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted to the author(s) of this abstract to reproduce and distribute it freely, for noncommercial purposes. Permission is hereby granted to any individual scientist to download a single copy of this electronic file and reproduce up to 20 paper copies for noncommercial purposes advancing science and education, including classroom use, providing all reproductions include the complete content shown here, including the author information. All other forms of reproduction and/or transmittal are prohibited without written permission from GSA Copyright Permissions.