Late Cenozoic extension and crustal doming in the India‐Eurasia collision zone: New thermochronologic constraints from the NE Chinese Pamir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The northward motion of the Pamir indenter with respect to Eurasia has resulted in coeval thrusting, strike‐slip faulting, and normal faulting. The eastern Pamir is currently deformed by east‐west oriented extension, accompanied by uplift and exhumation of the Kongur Shan (7719 m) and Muztagh Ata (7546 m) gneiss domes. Both domes are an integral part of the footwall of the Kongur Shan extensional fault system (KES), a 250 km long, north‐south oriented graben. Why active normal faulting within the Pamir is primarily localized along the KES and not distributed more widely throughout the orogen has remained unclear. In addition, relatively little is known about how deformation has evolved throughout the Cenozoic, despite refined estimates on present‐day crustal deformation rates and microseismicity, which indicate where crustal deformation is presently being accommodated. To better constrain the spatiotemporal evolution of faulting along the KES, we present 39 new apatite fission track, zircon U‐Th‐Sm/He, and 40 Ar/ 39 Ar cooling ages from a series of footwall transects along the KES graben shoulder. Combining these data with present‐day topographic relief, 1‐D thermokinematic and exhumational modeling documents successive stages, rather than synchronous deformation and gneiss dome exhumation. While the exhumation of the Kongur Shan commenced during the late Miocene, extensional processes in the Muztagh Ata massif began earlier and have slowed down since the late Miocene. We present a new model of synorogenic extension suggesting that thermal and density effects associated with a lithospheric tear fault along the eastern margin of the subducting Alai slab localize extensional upper plate deformation along the KES and decouple crustal motion between the central/western Pamir and eastern Pamir/Tarim basin.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".