Paleomagnetism and U–Pb geochronology of the Lac de Gras diabase dyke swarm, Slave Province, Canada: implications for relative drift of Slave and Superior provinces in the PaleoproterozoicGeological Survey of Canada Contribution 20080350.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lac de Gras diabase dykes trend north to NNE across the central Slave Province of the Canadian Shield. U–Pb baddeleyite ages of 2023 ± 2 and 2027 ± 4 Ma are interpreted as dyke emplacement ages. These ages are similar to that of the Booth River igneous complex, exposed along the margins of Kilohigok Basin near the northern end of the dyke swarm. Ten paleomagnetic sites (from four to six dykes) yield a mean paleopole at 11.8°N, 92.1°W (dm = 8.4°, dp = 6.0°). A positive baked contact test where a Lac de Gras dyke crosscuts a NE-trending Malley dyke demonstrates that this pole is primary. It represents the first key Paleoproterozoic pole from the Slave Province and, hence, the first Paleoproterozoic Slave pole suitable for reconstructing paleocontinents. Although a direct comparison is not available with precisely dated paleopoles of identical age from other Archean cratons, a comparison is made with a sequence of precisely dated poles from Superior Province dyke swarms, including those 40–50 million years older and 25 million years younger. It yields two options depending on the relative magnetic polarity assumed for data from the two cratons. The two cratons were either at similar latitudes, but not in their present relative orientations, when the swarms were emplaced, or separated in latitude by ∼40°–60°. In either case, they may have drifted separately or formed part of a single (super)continent that subsequently broke up with the two cratons drifting separately to attain their present configuration. Additional key paleopoles are required to distinguish between these interpretations.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".