Paleomagnetism of Paleozoic and Mesozoic sediments from the southern margin of Mongol‐Okhotsk ocean, far eastern Russia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents new data from paleomagnetic investigations of Middle Paleozoic (Early‐Middle‐Late Devonian, Early Carboniferous) and Middle Jurassic geological units from the Amuria block south of the Mongol‐Okhotsk suture zone. With fold tests for all localities, and two polarities for the Devonian, our new results constrain the evolution of the Mongol‐Okhotsk ocean from the Devonian to the Middle Jurassic. The corresponding paleopoles lie at 21.6°N, 6.3°E ( dp / dm = 5.3°/10.6°) for Early Devonian, 26.3°N, 345.3°E ( dp / dm = 6.4°/12.8°) for Early‐Middle Devonian, 24.6°N, 12.9°E ( dp / dm = 8.7°/16.9°) for Middle‐Late Devonian, 40.5°N, 352.4°E ( dp / dm = 9°/16.7°) for Late Devonian, 39.8°N, 31.6°E ( dp / dm = 10°/15.5°) for Early Carboniferous, and 46°N, 37.9°E ( dp / dm = 9.4°/13.4°) for Middle Jurassic. The poles confirm that the large Paleozoic Mongol‐Okhotsk ocean closed during the Jurassic, ending up in the late Jurassic or early Cretaceous at the eastern end of the suture zone, as originally proposed on geological grounds. The new paleomagnetic results exhibit large tectonic rotations about local vertical axes, which we interpret as probably arising from both the collision process and left‐lateral shear movement along the suture zone, related to incipient extrusion of Amuria due to indentation of India into Asia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 teacher head, 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".