MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122781189 · doi:10.1590/0001-3765201420120005

Monazite ID-TIMS U-Pb geochronology in the LAGIR laboratory, Rio de Janeiro State University: protocols and first applications to the assembly of Gondwana supercontinent in SE-Brazil

2014· article· en· W2122781189 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Carla Neto, Cláudio de Morisson Valeriano, Cláudia Regina Passarelli, Mônica Heilbron, Marcela Lobato

Bibliographic record

VenueAnais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité du Québec à Montréal
KeywordsMonaziteGeochronologyGeologySupercontinentGeochemistryGondwanaContext (archaeology)MineralogyPaleontologyZircon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The chemical and spectrometric procedures of the U-Pb geochronology method on monazites, recently installed in the LAGIR laboratory, are described in detail. In addition, preliminary results on monazite samples from the Brasília and Ribeira belts are reported and discussed in the context of the regional geology. Several experiments for calibration of ion exchange chromatographic columns with the AG-1x8 resin, were performed with HCl, using dissolved natural monazite samples. The Pb blanks of reagents are ∼0.5 pg/g in acids and ∼1 pg/g in H2O. The total Pb blanks in chemical procedures were below 22 pg. Preliminary results are presented from three case studies related to Brasiliano orogenic belts of SE-Brazil, which correlate very well with previous age determinations from literature: two sub-concordant grains from an Araxá Group quartzite (southern Brasília belt) define a concordia age of 602.6 ±1.4 Ma; a -0.8% discordant grain from a quartzite of the São Fidelis Group (Costeiro Domain, central Ribeira belt) yielded a concordia age of 535.3 ± 2.4 Ma; two 0.4 % and 1.3 % discordant monazite grains from the post-collisional Itaoca Granite (Costeiro Domain, central Ribeira belt) define a concordia age of 476.4 ± 1.8 Ma.

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)0.000
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 score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnais da Academia Brasileira de CiênciasSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207