REPRODUCIBILITY IN CYCLOSTRATIGRAPHY: INITIATING AN INTERCOMPARISON PROJECT

Matthias Sinnesael, David De Vleeschouwer, Christian Zeeden, Philippe Claeys

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference paperResearch

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.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationGeological Society of America Abstracts with Programs
PublisherGeological Society of America
Number of pages1
Volume49
Edition6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017
EventGeological Society of America Annual Meeting 2017 - Seattle, United States
Duration: 22 Oct 201725 Oct 2017
Conference number: 2017
http://www.geosociety.org/GSA/Events/Annual_Meeting/GSA/Events/gsa2017.aspx

Conference

ConferenceGeological Society of America Annual Meeting 2017
Abbreviated titleGSA Annual Meeting
CountryUnited States
CitySeattle
Period22/10/1725/10/17
Internet address

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'REPRODUCIBILITY IN CYCLOSTRATIGRAPHY: INITIATING AN INTERCOMPARISON PROJECT'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this