The evolution of the Onaping Formation at the Sudbury impact structure
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract– The 1.4–1.6 km thick Onaping Formation consists of a complex series of breccias and “melt bodies” lying above the Sudbury Igneous Complex (SIC) at the Sudbury impact structure. Based on the presence of shocked lithic clasts and various “glassy” phases, the Onaping has been described as a “suevitic” breccia, with an origin, at least in part, as fallback material. Recent mapping and a redefined stratigraphy have emphasized similarities and differences in its various vitric phases, both as clast types and discrete intrusive bodies. The nature of the Onaping and that of other “suevitic” breccias overlying impact melt sheets is reviewed. The relative thickness, internal stratigraphic and lithological character, and the relative chronology of depositional units indicate multiple processes were involved over some time in the formation of the Onaping. The Sudbury structure formed in a foreland basin and water played an essential role in the evolution of the Onaping, as indicated by a major hydrothermal system generated during its formation. Taken together, observations and interpretations of the Onaping suggest a working hypothesis for the origin of the Onaping that includes not only impact but also the interaction of sea water with the impact melt, resulting in repeated explosive interactions involving proto‐SIC materials and mixing with pre‐existing lithologies. This is complicated by additional brecciation events due to the intrusion of proto‐SIC materials into the evolving and thickening Onaping. Fragmentation mechanisms changed as the system evolved and involved vesiculation in the formation of the upper two‐thirds of the Onaping.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it