Detrital zircon analysis of Mesoproterozoic and Neoproterozoic metasedimentary rocks of north-central Idaho: implications for development of the Belt–Purcell basin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The authors analyzed detrital zircon grains from 10 metasedimentary rock samples of the Priest River complex and three other amphibolite-facies metamorphic sequences in north-central Idaho to test the previous assignment of these rocks to the Mesoproterozoic Belt–Purcell Supergroup. Zircon grains from two samples of the Prichard Formation (lower Belt) and one sample of Cambrian quartzite were also analyzed as controls with known depositional ages. U–Pb zircon analysis by laser ablation — inductively coupled plasma — mass spectrometry reveals that 6 of the 10 samples contain multiple age populations between 1900 and 1400 Ma and a scatter of older ages, similar to results reported from the Belt–Purcell Supergroup to the north and east. Results from the Priest River metamorphic complex confirm previous correlations with the Prichard Formation. Samples from the Golden and Elk City sequences have significant numbers of 1500–1380 Ma grains, which indicates that they do not predate the Belt. Rather, they are probably from a relatively young, southwestern part of the Belt Supergroup (Lemhi subbasin). Non-North American (1610–1490 Ma) grains are rare in these rocks. Three samples of quartzite from the Syringa metamorphic sequence northwest of the Idaho batholith contain zircon grains younger than the Belt Supergroup and support a Neoproterozoic age. A single Cambrian sample has abundant 1780 Ma grains and none younger than ∼1750 Ma. These results indicate that the likely protoliths of many high-grade metamorphic rocks in northern Idaho were strata of the Belt–Purcell Supergroup or overlying rocks of the Neoproterozoic Windermere Supergroup and not basement rocks.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".