MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983966359 · doi:10.1029/2004eo500002

Is there a mantle plume below Italy?

2004· article· en· W1983966359 on OpenAlexafffund
Keith Bell, Francesca Castorina, Giusy Lavecchia, Gianluigi Rosatelli, Francesco Stoppa

Bibliographic record

VenueEos · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMagmatismGeologyMantle plumeGeochemistryMantle (geology)Igneous rockPlumeUpwellingSubductionEarth scienceLithosphereTectonicsPaleontologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some of the most diverse igneous rocks found on Earth occur along the length of Italy and in many of the islands in the southeastern Tyrrhenian Sea, all the result of Cenozoic magmatism. Magmas extremely rich in alkalis, particularly potassium, and many undersaturated with respect to silica, were erupted, as well as others of calc‐alkalic affinity (see legend in Figure 1). Their origin has been the subject of heated debate, and there is still no general consensus about how they formed. Most attribute them to subduction‐related processes (see Beccaluva et al. [2004] for a review); others consider them to be the result of within‐plate magmatism [e.g., Vollmer, 1976; Lauecchia and Stoppa, 1996]. Still others consider magmatism the result of a deep, mantle upwelling within a slab window coupled with mixing between isotopically different reservoirs [Gasperini et al., 2002].

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.175 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations77
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEosSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207