MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103656667 · doi:10.1093/petrology/egn028

On the Pseudomorphing of Melt-filled Pores During the Crystallization of Migmatites

2008· article· en· W2103656667 on OpenAlexaff
Marian B. Holness, E. W. Sawyer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Petrology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMigmatiteGranuliteGeologyNucleationPseudomorphPartial meltingCrystallizationGeochemistryMineralogyMetamorphic faciesFaciesGneissMetamorphic rockCrustGeomorphologyChemistryQuartz

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pseudomorphs of melt-filled pores, recognized by their generally cuspate shape, are used as diagnostic for the former presence of partial melt. They are commonly observed in migmatites from the mid- to deep crust although they occur in the smaller pores in migmatites from shallower levels (1–2 kbar). The pseudomorphing of melt-filled pores is controlled by the kinetics of nucleation and is a consequence of the greater supersaturation required for nucleation in a small pore compared with a larger one. We examine three migmatites in detail: a contact metamorphosed cherty band from an iron formation; an Archaean regional granulite from an accretionary prism; and an amphibolite-facies sample from the roots of an Archaean mountain chain. The greater undercooling required for nucleation in progressively smaller pores is recorded by the composition of plagioclase pseudomorphs. A study of dihedral angles at the corners of pseudomorphed pores demonstrates that melt–solid textural equilibrium was probably attained only in the contact aureole. The regional granulite preserves an almost unmodified reaction-controlled melt distribution, with little evidence for either melt–solid textural equilibration or solid–solid re-equilibration, whereas the reaction-controlled melt distribution in the regional amphibolite-facies example has been modified by a partial approach to solid–solid textural equilibrium. It is not clear whether the differences in dihedral angle population are due to differences in uplift and exhumation rates or due to the presence of H2O on grain boundaries.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations295
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of PetrologySame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207