Origin of the Archean Sask craton and its extent within the Trans-Hudson orogen: evidence from Pb and Nd isotopic compositions of basement rocks and post-orogenic intrusions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UPb zircon ages from the exposed Sask craton are 24503100 Ma, from the Peter Lake Domain 25752640 Ma, and from rocks of the Trans-Hudson orogen 18401880 Ma. UPb monazite and zircon ages of post-orogenic pegmatites and aplites are 17701800 Ma. Common Pb and SmNd isotopic compositions of post-orogenic intrusions, as probes of crust beneath the orogen, were compared to Sask craton rocks and ca. 1850 Ma orogenic rocks to infer the origin and subsurface distribution of the Sask craton within the internides of the Trans-Hudson orogen. Results show that post-orogenic intrusions within most of the Glennie Domain and Hanson Lake block were derived, at least in part, from Archean source materials, demonstrating that the Sask craton lies beneath Paleoproterozoic orogenic rocks present at the surface. In contrast, common Pb and SmNd isotopic compositions from pegmatites and aplites of the La Ronge Domain are essentially identical with those of the Paleoproterozoic orogenic rocks into which they are intruded, indicating derivation by partial melting of similar rocks. Thus, if the Sask craton extended to the west beneath the La Ronge Domain, it was beneath the zone of melting that produced the post-orogenic intrusions, making it unlikely that the Sask craton is a detached part of the Hearne craton. Many samples from the Sask craton have elevated 208Pb/204Pb ratios, unlike Superior craton or Hearne craton rocks, suggesting that the Sask craton was derived from an exotic source, such as the Wyoming craton, which shares similar elevated 208Pb/204Pb ratios.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".