MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1527645362

Magma Reservoirs Feeding Giant Radiating Dike Swarms: Insights from Venus

2003· article· en· W1527645362 on OpenAlexaff
E. B. Grosfils, Richard E. Ernst

Bibliographic record

VenueLunar and Planetary Science XXXIV · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDikeGeologyMagmaPopulationTectonicsGeophysicsPaleontologyVolcano
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Evidence of lateral dike propagation from shallow magma reservoirs is quite common on the terrestrial planets, and examination of the giant radiating dike swarm population on Venus continues to provide new insight into the way these complex magmatic systems form and evolve. For example, it is becoming clear that many swarms are an amalgamation of multiple discrete phases of dike intrusion. This is not surprising in and of itself, as on Earth there is clear evidence that formation of both magma reservoirs and individual giant radiating dikes often involves periodic magma injection. Similarly, giant radiating swarms on Earth can contain temporally discrete subswarms defined on the basis of geometry, crosscutting relationships, and geochemical or paleomagnetic signatures. The Venus data are important, however, because erosion, sedimentation, plate tectonic disruption, etc. on Earth have destroyed most giant radiating dike swarm's source regions, and thus we remain uncertain about the geometry and temporal evolution of the magma sources from which the dikes are fed. Are the reservoirs which feed the dikes large or small, and what are the implications for how the dikes themselves form? Does each subswarm originate from a single, periodically reactivated reservoir, or do subswarms emerge from multiple discrete geographic foci? If the latter, are these discrete foci located at the margins of a single large magma body, or do multiple smaller reservoirs define the character of the magmatic center as a whole? Similarly, does the locus of magmatic activity change with time, or are all the foci active simultaneously? Careful study of giant radiating dike swarms on Venus is yielding the data necessary to address these questions and constrain future modeling efforts. Here, using giant radiating dike swarms from the Nemesis Tessera (V14) and Carson (V43) quadrangles as examples, we illustrate some of the dike swarm focal region diversity observed on Venus and briefly explore some key implications for the questions framed above.

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)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLunar and Planetary Science XXXIVSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207