Rifting, subsidence and continental break-up above a mantle plume in the central South Atlantic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract New seismic and well data in the deep-water basins of Campos, Santos, South Kwanza and Benguela, supported by plate reconstructions, help answer fundamental questions on the rifting history of the central South Atlantic, specifically on the amount and effect of fault-related deformation, and on when and where sea-floor spreading started. The Paraná mantle plume played a fundamental role – dynamically raising the plate, prolonging continental rifting by heat-softening the crust and, after break-up, delaying the onset of marine conditions. Previous discrepancies in extension and subsidence have been solved, and the location and age of the continent–ocean boundary can now be determined. Rifting involved approximately 450 km of homogeneous pure shear, equivalent to a β factor (lithosphere stretching factor) of 4.5. Break-up occurred at 123 Ma (Barremian–Aptian boundary), 7–8 Ma later than the southern South Atlantic but 6 Ma before widespread salt deposition. The mid-Atlantic ridge was initially subaerial, marked by a volcanic high. Sea-floor spreading was at a rate of 24 mm year −1 , similar to syn-rift deformation prior to break-up. Transcontinental strike-slip shear zones are not evident but a major NW–SE lithospheric lineament associated with a failed triple junction arm had a major influence on the magmatic history, both prior to and after break-up. Supplementary material: A4 versions of the seismic sections shown in Figures 6 & 7 are available at http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/SUP18563 .
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.002 |
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".