Assessment of the relationship between emplacement of the Algoman plutons and regional deformation in the Rainy Lake region, Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Algoman suite of granites and granodiorites, located within the Rainy Lake region of the Superior Province, intruded the Wabigoon–Quetico subprovince boundary about 2686 Ma. Deformation occurred during the late Archean collision between the Wabigoon and Wawa volcanic arcs. The Algoman plutons are the youngest rocks in the region. Their apparent lack of macroscopic deformation fabrics has led previous researchers to use their age as a constraint for the cessation of regional deformation. However, contrasting competence between the relatively rigid granites and surrounding volcanic and metasedimentary rocks suggests that obvious deformation fabrics may not be observed in the plutons even if they were present during deformation. A field, anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility (AMS), gravity inversion model, and microstructural study were undertaken on two neighboring Algoman plutons to determine their emplacement history relative to the regional deformation. There is a steep macroscopic foliation in the adjacent rocks and in parts of the plutons. The magnetic foliation is very strong and roughly coincident with the field foliations. The gravity inversion models indicate that the plutons are relatively shallow (1 km and 4.5 km at their deepest points), and their shapes are consistent with emplacement during dextral transpression. Quartz microstructures, such as undulose extinction and subgrain formation, indicate that there was some solid-state deformation accommodated by dislocation creep mechanisms. The field, AMS, gravity, and microstructural evidence indicate that the plutons were most likely emplaced syntectonically. Thus, the pluton age does not provide a conclusive constraint to the cessation of regional deformation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".