Tracking the Late Jurassic apparent (or true) polar shift in U‐Pb‐dated kimberlites from cratonic North America (Superior Province of Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Different versions of a composite apparent polar wander (APW) path of variably selected global poles assembled and averaged in North American coordinates using plate reconstructions show either a smooth progression or a large (∼30°) gap in mean paleopoles in the Late Jurassic, between about 160 and 145 Ma. In an effort to further examine this issue, we sampled accessible outcrops/subcrops of kimberlites associated with high‐precision U‐Pb perovskite ages in the Timiskaming area of Ontario, Canada. The 154.9 ± 1.1 Ma Peddie kimberlite yields a stable normal polarity magnetization that is coaxial within less than 5° of the reverse polarity magnetization of the 157.5 ± 1.2 Ma Triple B kimberlite. The combined ∼156 Ma Triple B and Peddie pole (75.5°N, 189.5°E, A95 = 2.8°) lies about midway between igneous poles from North America nearest in age (169 Ma Moat volcanics and the 146 Ma Ithaca kimberlites), showing that the polar motion was at a relatively steady yet rapid (∼1.5°/Myr) pace. A similar large rapid polar swing has been recognized in the Middle to Late Jurassic APW path for Adria‐Africa and Iran‐Eurasia, suggesting a major mass redistribution. One possibility is that slab breakoff and subduction reversal along the western margin of the Americas triggered an episode of true polar wander.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".