Ocean-continent-transition at magma poor rifted margins, the magnetic signature of a magmatic breakup?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Magnetic anomalies have been identified from M0 up to anomalies M20-M22 both in the Newfoundland basin and in the Iberian abyssal plain. A large amplitude magnetic anomaly (the J anomaly) marks the beginning of this M sequence of anomalies. These magnetic anomalies have been extensively used to constrain the position of Iberia relative to the European, African and American plates from the late Jurassique to the early Cretaceous times e.g. (Srivastava, 2000). However, the sources for these magnetic anomalies are strongly debated as they were not identified in typical oceanic crust but within the OCT (some have even shown afterwards to be located well within thinned continental crust (Funck, 2003)). They are thus different from standard seafloor spreading magnetic anomalies produced mainly by the cooling of basalts and interpreted as isochrones. The magnetic anomalies within the OCTs in the Iberian abyssal plain and Newfoundland basin are thought to be caused either by the serpentinization of the exposed mantle rocks (Sibuet, 2007) or by magmatic intrusions (Russell, 2003). We investigate the possibility that the magnetic lineation mapped as M0 is in fact not a seafloor spreading lineation. We propose an alternative model based on forward modeling of magnetic anomaly profiles using seismic refraction and drill hole data. We suggest that the main magnetic anomaly (J anomaly) in the OCTs of the Iberian-Newfoundland margins might be explained by underplated magmatic bodies and surface lava flows that post-date mantle exhumation. These magmatic bodies and lavas may result from a late Aptian tectono-magmatic event which marks the transition to seafloor spreading.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".