Exhumation and uplift of the Shillong plateau and its influence on the eastern Himalayas: New constraints from apatite and zircon (U‐Th‐[Sm])/He and apatite fission track analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Shillong plateau is the only raised topography in the foreland of the Himalayas. Located on the trajectory of the Indian Summer Monsoon (ISM), the plateau perturbs the regional distribution of precipitation. As such, the Shillong plateau‐eastern Himalaya‐ISM is a unique system to quantify the couplings between climate, tectonics, and erosion. A change in long‐term erosion rates along‐strike of the Bhutan Himalaya was recently attributed to a climatic modulation due to the uplift of the Shillong plateau. To test this interpretation, it is essential to constrain the timing and rate at which the plateau was uplifted and the amount of partitioning of the India‐Asia convergence into the plateau. We used apatite and zircon (U‐Th‐[Sm])/He and apatite fission track analyses to unravel the thermal histories of 13 basement samples collected along a N‐S transect across the central Shillong plateau. We find that (1) the exhumation of the plateau began at least 9–15 Ma ago, (2) its surface uplift was chronologically decoupled from its exhumation and started after ∼3–4 Ma at rates of 0.4–0.53 mm/a, (3) the long‐term horizontal shortening rate accommodated by the plateau is 0.65–2.3 mm/a, which represents only 10–15% of the India‐Asia convergence rate. The uplift of the Shillong plateau did not significantly modify the rock uplift rate in the Bhutan Himalaya, which is consistent with the hypothesis of climatic modulation of the Pliocene erosion, tectonic, and landscape evolution previously documented along this orogenic front.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".