MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152903552 · doi:10.1093/petrology/egn056

Formation of Igneous Layering in Granodiorite by Gravity Flow: a Field, Microstructure and Geochemical Study of the Tuolumne Intrusive Suite at Sawmill Canyon, California

2008· article· en· W2152903552 on OpenAlexaff
Fabien Solgadi, 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
KeywordsGeologyPlutonGeochemistryMagmaTitaniteIgneous rockBiotitePlagioclaseMagma chamberPetrologyMetamorphic rockVolcanoSeismologyQuartz

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Layered granites and granodiorites occur in many plutons. They occur, together with non-layered granodiorites, at the margin of the Tuolumne Intrusive Suite, one of the largest late Cretaceous intrusions in the Sierra Nevada. Results from field observations, quantitative microstructural analysis and whole-rock compositions from the non-layered Kuna Crest, Half Dome and Cathedral Peak granodiorites and layered granodiorites from the Sawmill Canyon area are compared to determine which processes contributed to the formation of the layering. The non-layered granodiorites have foliated but homogeneous microstructures, which are attributed to the orientation of crystals with high aspect ratios when the magma flowed before solidification; their compositions are consistent with magma mixing and fractional crystallization. The microstructure in the layered granodiorite is heterogeneous, and shows normal gradation of the dense, primocryst minerals magnetite, hornblende and titanite at the base, and inverse size gradation with large crystals of the less dense primocryst phases plagioclase and biotite at the top, and a systematic change in the preferred orientation of minerals from base to top. Macroscopic structures in the layers indicate erosion and the action of traction currents when the layers formed, and the sinking of the dense minerals and rise of interstitial melt immediately afterwards. The layered rocks have similar grain size and mineral compositions to the non-layered granodiorites, and thus could be derived from the same magmas as the Kuna Crest, Half Dome and Cathedral Peak non-layered granodiorites. The major and trace element variations in the layered rocks are very different from those in the non-layered rocks and indicate a strong segregation of crystals during formation of the layers. However, the separation process did not fractionate the main rare earth element-bearing phases from one another. The macrostructure and microstructural features in the layers resemble those from hyper-concentrated sediment gravity flows. The layering is interpreted to have formed from gravity flows of melt and crystals initiated by syn-magmatic tectonic deformation and seismic shaking. Two types of layering are identified; one, called normal layering, represents material derived from a single granodiorite magma and deposited from a relatively low-energy gravity flow, whereas the other, called melanocratic layering, incorporated mafic minerals eroded from the substrate, had the felsic tops of layers eroded off by subsequent flows, incorporated crystals from more than one magma source and formed from gravity flows that had higher energy.

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)0.000
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Citations46
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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