MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035872927 · doi:10.1139/e01-021

Paleomagnetism of the Quottoon plutonic complex in the Coast Mountains of British Columbia and southeastern Alaska: evidence for tilting during uplift

2001· article· en· W2035872927 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Robert F. Butler, George E. Gehrels, M. L. Crawford, William A. Crawford

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGeologyTransectSillPaleomagnetismPlutonInletHornblendeClockwiseGeomorphologySeismologyOceanographyPaleontologyGeochemistryFold (higher-order function)Tectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Quottoon plutonic complex (part of the great tonalite sill) was emplaced into eastern parts of the Coast shear zone along the west flank of the Coast Mountains. U–Pb crystallization ages range from 72.3 to 55.5 Ma. A regional compilation of K–Ar hornblende dates from the tonalite sill indicates a west to east decrease from ~60 Ma to ~54 Ma across the intrusive suite. Paleomagnetic samples were collected at 160 sites ([Formula: see text] 8 samples per site) along six transects across the Quottoon complex between the Skeena River and Willard Inlet. Directions of characteristic remanent magnetization (ChRM) were successfully determined by principal component analysis of thermal demagnetization data for about half of the samples collected. Site-mean ChRM directions were determined for 56 sites from the Skeena River, Quottoon Inlet, Steamer Passage, and Wales Island transects, using criteria of [Formula: see text] 4 sample ChRM directions per site and 95% confidence limit (α 95 ) [Formula: see text] 25°. For Filmore Island and Willard Inlet, few sites provided adequate determinations of site-mean ChRM directions, but many sample ChRM directions were well determined and consistent. The mean direction from the Skeena River – Quottoon Inlet collection is nearly concordant with the expected Eocene direction. Mean directions from other transects have clockwise-rotated declinations and inclinations that are shallower than the expected direction by up to 23°. Consistent with expectations for east-side-up tilting of crustal panels, sites from the western part of each transect have mean directions farther from the Eocene expected direction than do sites from the eastern part of the transect. The magnitude of east-side-up tilt varies along strike: the Skeena River to Quottoon Inlet segment experienced little or no tilt; Steamer Passage south of Portland Inlet records 15° tilt; north of Portland Inlet, tilts are 40° for Wales Island and 35° for Filmore Island; farther north, tilt decreases to 12° for Willard Inlet. Tilting was driven by Eocene extension of the Coast Mountains, with tilted crustal panels bounded by northwest-striking, east-side-down normal faults and northeast-striking transfer faults or shear zones. The ACCRETE seismic transect imaged east-dipping reflectors down to ~15 km depth, which likely correspond to the east-side-down normal faults. The most significant of the northeast-striking transfer structures must underlie Portland Inlet. Based on a tilting domino model, about 30% extension is required to produce the 40° tilt of crustal blocks at Wales and Filmore islands.

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)0.001
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 score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations23
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism StudiesFrench-language works237,207