MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095783334 · doi:10.2475/08.2011.01

Sutton hotspot: Resolving Ediacaran-Cambrian Tectonics and true polar wander for Laurentia

2011· article· en· W2095783334 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHotspot (geology)PaleomagnetismGeologyApparent polar wanderMantle plumeLaurentiaPolar wanderPlate tectonicsPaleontologyPlumeMantle (geology)GeophysicsTectonicsLithosphereGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hotspot tracks represent plate motions relative to mantle sources, and paleomagnetic data from magmatic units along those tracks can quantify motions of those mantle anomalies relative to the Earth9s magnetic field and rotational axis. The Ediacaran Period is notable for rapid and large paleomagnetic apparent polar wander (APW) for many continents. Whereas magmatic units attributed to the "Sutton" mantle plume suggest a practically stationary hotspot track, paleolatitudes of Laurentia for that interval vary dramatically; geologic and paleomagnetic data are at odds unless true polar wander (TPW) is invoked to explain a majority of APW. Here we test the plume-TPW hypothesis by generating the predicted Sutton hotspot track for a stationary plume under a moving plate along the Laurentian margin during the interval from 615 to 530 Ma. Our model is the first to provide a kinematic framework for the extensive large igneous province associated with opening the Iapetus Ocean.

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.702

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 studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.188 · 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