MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987584950 · doi:10.1144/0016-764903-054

Provenance constraints from detrital zircon U–Pb ages in the NW Iberian Massif: implications for Palaeozoic plate configuration and Variscan evolution

2004· article· en· W1987584950 on OpenAlexaff
José R. Martı́nez Catalán, Javier Fernández‐Suárez, George A. Jenner, Елена Белоусова, Alejandro Díez Montes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Geological Society · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMassifGeologyPaleozoicZirconProvenancePaleontologyGeochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detrital zircons from pre-orogenic Upper Ordovician to Devonian low-grade metasedimentary rocks have been dated by laser ablation–inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA–ICP-MS) to: (1) constrain the variations of zircon age populations within the autochthonous sequences of NW Iberia; (2) compare U–Pb detrital zircon ages with previous data; (3) test the hypothesis of the Armorica microplate as a peri-Gondwanan terrane separated from Gondwana. The similarity in the ages of detrital zircons found in the Palaeozoic samples studied here to those published for the Upper Proterozoic, Lower Cambrian and Lower Ordovician sediments of NW Iberia argues against the separation of Armorica, and points to a common source area for all of the Palaeozoic detrital formations of NW Iberia, the West African craton and the surrounding Pan-African belts. LA–ICP-MS U–Pb dating of zircons from a synorogenic flysch preserved in klippen in the core of a syncline establishes a maximum depositional age for this deposit as Early Namurian. This age is also a maximum age limit for thrusting and refolding in this part of the Iberian Massif. Correlation of the zircon age populations with published ages confirms the link between the emplacement of the allochthonous complexes of NW Iberia and synorogenic sedimentation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations110
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Geological SocietySame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207