MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155393556 · doi:10.1130/g25247a.1

Grenville Province and Monteregian carbonatite and nepheline syenite distribution related to rifting, collision, and plume passage

2008· article· en· W2155393556 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kevin Burke, Shuhab D. Khan, Ronald W. Mart

Bibliographic record

VenueGeology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDrug Applied Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences
KeywordsCitationRiftCarbonatiteGeologyLibrary scienceArchaeologyGeochemistryGeographyTectonicsPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research Article| December 01, 2008 Grenville Province and Monteregian carbonatite and nepheline syenite distribution related to rifting, collision, and plume passage Kevin Burke; Kevin Burke 1Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77204, USA Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Shuhab D. Khan; Shuhab D. Khan 1Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77204, USA Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Ronald W. Mart Ronald W. Mart 1Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77204, USA Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Author and Article Information Kevin Burke 1Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77204, USA Shuhab D. Khan 1Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77204, USA Ronald W. Mart 1Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Houston, Houston, Texas 77204, USA Publisher: Geological Society of America Received: 12 Jun 2008 Revision Received: 02 Sep 2008 Accepted: 03 Sep 2008 First Online: 02 Mar 2017 Online ISSN: 1943-2682 Print ISSN: 0091-7613 © 2008 Geological Society of America Geology (2008) 36 (12): 983–986. https://doi.org/10.1130/G25247A.1 Article history Received: 12 Jun 2008 Revision Received: 02 Sep 2008 Accepted: 03 Sep 2008 First Online: 02 Mar 2017 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Permissions Search Site Citation Kevin Burke, Shuhab D. Khan, Ronald W. Mart; Grenville Province and Monteregian carbonatite and nepheline syenite distribution related to rifting, collision, and plume passage. Geology 2008;; 36 (12): 983–986. doi: https://doi.org/10.1130/G25247A.1 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Refmanager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentBy SocietyGeology Search Advanced Search Abstract Stimulated by the recognition of a rifted continental margin to pre-Grenville Laurentia, we interpret the deformed alkaline igneous rocks and carbonatites (DARCs) adjacent to that margin in the Bancroft domain of Ontario, Canada, to be rocks initially erupted as alkaline rocks and carbonatites (ARCs) in an intra-continental rift. When an ocean began to form, rupturing Laurentia on the site of that rift, the newly formed Laurentian rifted continental margin contained ARCs that had erupted into the intra-continental rift. Later in a Wilson cycle of ocean opening and closing, those ARCs became DARCs during a collision that sutured the Grenville province composite arc belt and Bancroft domain rocks against the margin of Laurentia on the Central Meta-sedimentary Belt boundary thrust zone. Using this interpretation we show that DARCs of the down-dip Bancroft domain suture zone in the mantle at a depth of ~100 km are likely sources of the Early Cretaceous ARC rocks in the Monteregian province. You do not have access to this content, please speak to your institutional administrator if you feel you should have access.

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 score0.391

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations25
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeologySame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207