Ophiolites in China: their distribution, ages and tectonic settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ophiolites are widespread and abundant in China, where they lie along suture zones delineating major tectonic blocks. They range in age from Proterozoic to Tertiary and generally belong to the Palaeo-Asian, Qinling-Qilian-Kunlun, Tethyan and Circum-Pacific systems. A few possible Proterozoic ophiolites may reflect rifting of Rodinia at c. 800–1000 Ma. The Palaeo-Asian ophiolites, which range in age from Cambrian to Carboniferous, crop out abundantly in the northern parts of the country whereas the Qinling-Qilian-Kunlun ophiolites occur in north-central China, along the boundaries of the Tarim, North China and Yangtze blocks. Tethyan ophiolites are confined to southwestern China and Tibet whereas those of the Circum-Pacific belt are found in Taiwan and northeastern China. Chinese ophiolites are typically tectonically disrupted mélanges composed of isolated blocks of peridotite, gabbro and basalt. Sheeted dykes are rare or absent. Many of the ophiolites are compositionally complex, containing mixtures of island-arc tholeiite and boninite with lesser amounts of mid-ocean ridge basalt and ocean-island basalt. Most show evidence of having been formed or assembled in suprasubduction zone environments. However, Palaeo-Tethyan ophiolites generally lack suprasubduction zone signatures and may have formed in small, intracontinental basins. A rapidly expanding database of high-precision age dates and detailed geochemical analyses on Chinese ophiolites is providing new insight into the nature and timing of the tectonic events that shaped this part of 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 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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".