Phanerozoic vertical motions of Hudson Bay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We analyze the sedimentary record of the Hudson Bay basin, an intracratonic basin which is widely believed to have been formed by convective downwelling within the mantle. This belief largely stems from the coincidence of a long-wavelength negative gravity anomaly and an approximately circular basin which is filled with about 2 km of predominantly Paleozoic sedimentary rocks. Our starting point is a set of wells and seismic reflection profiles which demonstrate that the basin subsided rapidly from Ordovician to Devonian times. One- and two-dimensional subsidence modeling show that water-loaded subsidence occurred in two stages and is too rapid to be accounted for by thermal contraction alone. Instead, we suggest that basin subsidence is consistent with minor phases of lithospheric thinning which occurred during OrdovicianSilurian and EarlyMiddle Devonian times. Stretching factors for these minor extensional episodes vary from 1.05 to 1.2 with vertical strain rates of 210 Ga1. Our interpretation of the subsidence record is corroborated by limited evidence for syn-rift normal faulting and crustal thinning inferred from legacy seismic reflection and refraction data sets. Subsidence modelling also suggests that about 1 km of expected thermal subsidence is missing. This discrepancy suggests that the basin was uplifted and denuded at least once, but possibly several times, between Late Devonian and Middle Cretaceous times (i.e., 360100 Ma) and between Cretaceous and Quaternary times. We conclude that the Hudson Bay basin was not generated by convective downwelling that initiated in Paleozoic times and that remained coupled to the lithospheric plate.
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) | 0.003 | 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".