MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062808878 · doi:10.1134/s0869591110050036

Isotope-geochemical constraints on the formation of the early Earth’ crust

2010· article· en· W2062808878 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elena Bibikova

Bibliographic record

VenuePetrology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyArcheanGeochemistryCrustFelsicBasaltMantle (geology)Continental crustIsotopeIsotope geochemistryEarth scienceMafic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analysis of isotope-geochemical data obtained for the early crustal complexes of the Earth provided constraints on the formation time, scales of development, and geochemical features of protocrust. Most informative were isotope-geochemical and geochemical data on the oldest zircons with ages up to 4.4 Ga, short-lived 146Sm/142Nd isotope system, and lead isotope composition of the oldest rocks of Greenland. The presence of positive 142Nd anomaly in the rocks of West Greenland and negative anomaly in the amphibolites of the oldest Nuvvuagittuq greenstone belt of the Superior province (O’Neil et al., 2008) indicates the early differentiation of the Earth material into depleted mantle and enriched (basaltic) crust (Caro et al., 2006; Benett et al., 2007a, b; O’Neil et al., 2008). Pb-Pb isotopic systematics of the oldest crustal rocks from West Greenland and Labrador testifies that high μ enriched crust (238U/204Pb = 10.9) of basaltic composition already existed 3.9 Ga ago (Kamber et al., 2003). Based on isotope-geochemical and geochemical features of the oldest zircons in the Late Archean greenstone belts of the Yilgarn block (Western Australia), the crust of intermediate-felsic composition and water on the Earth’s surface already existed 4.4 Ga ago (Wilde et al., 2001).

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.174 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePetrologySame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207