MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2068229534 · doi:10.1144/gsl.sp.2003.219.01.15

Back-arc spreading and mantle flow in the East Scotia Sea

2003· article· en· W2068229534 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Roy Livermore

Bibliographic record

VenueGeological Society London Special Publications · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMantle (geology)GeologyArc (geometry)Nova scotiaSeismologyOceanographyGeophysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The East Scotia Ridge exhibits systematic variations in axial morphology and basalt geochemistry. Central segments have morphology typical of intermediate-rate spreading centres and erupt mainly normal mid-ocean ridge basalt (N-MORB). Segments near the ridge ends exhibit anomalous, inflated, axial morphology and erupt more evolved basalts, influenced by the Bouvet plume in the north. As the end segments lie closer to the volcanic arc, these variations could be caused by coupled flow within the mantle wedge, as inferred from similar studies in the Lau Basin. Three of the four zones of crustal accretion defined from the Lau Basin may be identified in the East Scotia Sea, although there is no counterpart to a zone of diminished magma supply observed at the East Lau Spreading Centre. Superimposed on the pattern of plate-driven flow is a ridge-parallel flow related to inflow of Atlantic mantle into the East Scotia Sea back-arc region at both ends of the South Sandwich slab. The inflow causes enhanced magmatism and propagation of the end segments towards the middle of the back-arc region, and may be related to trench-parallel flow beneath the rapidly retreating slab. Alternatively, it may be driven by buoyancy flux from Atlantic hot spots. There is no evidence that retreat was ever driven by escape flow of Pacific mantle.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0570.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.187 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations45
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeological Society London Special PublicationsSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207