MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078662486 · doi:10.1029/2003jb002420

On partial thermoremanent magnetization tail checks in Thellier paleointensity determination

2003· article· en· W2078662486 on OpenAlexaff
Yongjae Yu, David J. Dunlop

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThermoremanent magnetizationRemanenceGeologyNatural remanent magnetizationMagnetiteDemagnetizing fieldMagnetizationPaleomagnetismGrain sizeRock magnetismMineralogyCondensed matter physicsMagnetic fieldGeophysicsPhysicsGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coarse magnetite grains, of multidomain (MD) or large pseudo‐single‐domain (PSD) size (≥10 μm approximately), cause nonlinearity and other problems in paleomagnetic field intensity determination and can lead to spurious paleointensity values. One suggested method of detecting their presence is to carry out an additional zero‐field heating step following the acquisition of partial thermoremanent magnetization (pTRM) to check for complete demagnetization of the pTRM. Residual undemagnetized pTRMs (“pTRM tails”) are characteristic of MD and large PSD grains and cause nonideal behavior in Thellier‐type paleointensity experiments. We have measured pTRM tails in synthetic and natural magnetites of many sizes and domain states (including PSD and MD), starting from two different initial states. First, a thermally demagnetized sample was given a pTRM by cooling in a field H from the blocking temperature T B . The pTRM tail is the remanence Δ M ptr remaining after zero‐field reheating to T B . Δ M ptr is most prominent for large grain sizes and when T B ≥ 500°C. We next measured pTRM tails Δ M ptr * produced in a Thellier paleointensity experiment. The initial state in this case is a total thermoremanent magnetization gradually reduced by double heatings (zero‐field followed by in‐field) to a set of increasing T B . For all synthetic and natural samples containing large PSD and MD magnetites, regardless of grain size or lithologic differences, Δ M ptr is significant but Δ M ptr * is negligible. That is, the pTRM tail checks are always zero in our model Thellier experiments. However, in practical paleointensity studies, the pTRM tail check method has been shown to be successful in detecting MD grains. The reason for these contrasting results is that our experiments were carried out with the field H lab that produced pTRM equal in intensity and parallel to the field H that produced natural remanent magnetization (NRM). In this special situation the pTRM tail is completely masked. For the pTRM tail check method to be most effective, either H lab should be applied at a large angle to the NRM direction or H lab should be larger than (twice or more) the paleofield H . This will highlight the pTRM tail; in the first case by deflecting the apparent NRM direction after the tail‐check step, and in the second case by increasing the apparent NRM intensity.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.694
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.277 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations47
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism StudiesFrench-language works237,207