Structure of the Archean English River subprovince: implications for the tectonic evolution of the western Superior Province, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The English River subprovince is one of two metasediment-dominated terranes in the western Superior Province. It has been interpreted as an accretionary complex, a foreland, or a fore-arc basin that developed and was subsequently deformed between the metavolcanic-rich Uchi subprovince and the orthogneiss- and metaplutonic-dominated Winnipeg River subprovince during a prolonged transpressive orogeny. To test these hypotheses, we combined a satellite image, aeromagnetic image, and Lithoprobe reflection seismic profile interpretation with detailed structural mapping to better characterize the internal geometry and significance of structural features in the western part of the subprovince in Ontario. Northward-directed subduction and collision of the Winnipeg River subprovince with the Uchi subprovince at ca. >2713–2698 Ma can account for the deposition of the sedimentary rocks, initial metamorphism, and the main phase of deformation in the subprovince, whereas the subduction of Wabigoon crust generated extensive tonalite magmatism in the Winnipeg River and English River subprovinces during the same period. A period of extension, after the docking of the Winnipeg River and Wabigoon subprovinces at ca. 2698 Ma, punctuated the compressive phases of the orogeny and was responsible for high-grade metamorphism, upward bending of the Moho, and localized deposition of late, coarse, alluvial–fluvial metasedimentary rocks. Renewed compression caused by the docking of the Wawa subprovince at ca. 2689–2684 Ma is likely responsible for a largely unrecognized regional upright folding and faulting event that controls the dominant structural geometry of the subprovince. Late in its tectonic evolution, strain was partitioned into dextral deformation that was strongly domainal and limited to the subprovince margins.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".