MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017208652 · doi:10.1029/2005gc001053

Differences between Archean and Proterozoic lithospheres: Assessment of the possible major role of thermal conductivity

2006· article· en· W2017208652 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
S. Petitjean, M. Rabinowicz, Michel Grégoire, Sébastien Chevrot

Bibliographic record

VenueGeochemistry Geophysics Geosystems · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicHigh-pressure geophysics and materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcheanGeologyMantle convectionCratonMantle (geology)LithosphereProterozoicGeophysicsGeochemistryPetrologyEarth's internal heat budgetMantle plumeSeismologyTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study heat transfer through the conductive lithosphere and convective mantle on the basis of a 2‐D convection model in order to better understand the differences between Archean and Proterozoic lithospheres. The original improvement in the modeling consists of a precise track of the cutoff temperature between conduction and convection. The conductive lithosphere is undeformable, and the convective mantle has a constant viscosity. The conductive lithosphere in Archean cratons is assumed to have a lower radiogenic heat production in the crust and/or the conductive mantle, and/or a higher cutoff temperature (attributed to a stiffening of the more depleted mantle) relative to Proterozoic terrains. We also investigate the effect of a fourth factor never considered before: an enhancement of the vertical thermal conductivity in the conductive Archean mantle due to a vertical lineation. Our model successfully predicts the observations on the Canadian and South African shields. A high vertical thermal conductivity in the Archean lithospheric mantle possibly associated to a radiogenic crust depletion explains many observations: i.e., (1) the development of a thick Archean cold root, (2) a dipping cold convective plume beneath Archean cratons, (3) a uniform mantle heat flux along Archean and Proterozoic terrains, and (4) strong high seismic velocity anomalies over Archean cratons. In addition, a lower radiogenic heat production of the lithospheric mantle or a larger cutoff temperature in Archean cratons is not favored by our models. Finally, we investigate how a cold root and a sub‐Archean cold mantle plume react to the shear induced by large‐scale mantle flow and to the collision with a hot mantle plume. Models show that shear removes the cold plume from below the Archean craton, but cold dipping instabilities are periodically generated inside the convective boundary layer below the Archean cratonic lid. However, the thick Archean lithospheric root may survive several orogeneses. In addition, the models show that it takes at least 200 Myr for a hot mantle plume to erode the thick lithospheric root. This suggests that an Archean root may only disappear if the plate remains above a hot plume for a very long time.

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 score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations43
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeochemistry Geophysics GeosystemsSame topicHigh-pressure geophysics and materialsFrench-language works237,207