What controls the growth of the Himalayan foreland fold-and-thrust belt?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research Article| March 01, 2014 What controls the growth of the Himalayan foreland fold-and-thrust belt? John Hirschmiller; John Hirschmiller 1Department of Earth Sciences, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 4R2, Canada Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Djordje Grujic; Djordje Grujic 1Department of Earth Sciences, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 4R2, Canada Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Bodo Bookhagen; Bodo Bookhagen 2Geography Department, University of California–Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California 93106-4060, USA Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Isabelle Coutand; Isabelle Coutand 1Department of Earth Sciences, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 4R2, Canada Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Pascale Huyghe; Pascale Huyghe 3Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Université J. Fourier, Maison des Géosciences BP 53, 38041 Grenoble Cedex, France Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Jean-Louis Mugnier; Jean-Louis Mugnier 3Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Université J. Fourier, Maison des Géosciences BP 53, 38041 Grenoble Cedex, France Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Tank Ojha Tank Ojha 4Department of Geosciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721, USA Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar Geology (2014) 42 (3): 247–250. https://doi.org/10.1130/G35057.1 Article history received: 23 Aug 2013 rev-recd: 04 Dec 2013 accepted: 11 Dec 2013 first online: 09 Mar 2017 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Search Site Citation John Hirschmiller, Djordje Grujic, Bodo Bookhagen, Isabelle Coutand, Pascale Huyghe, Jean-Louis Mugnier, Tank Ojha; What controls the growth of the Himalayan foreland fold-and-thrust belt?. Geology 2014;; 42 (3): 247–250. doi: https://doi.org/10.1130/G35057.1 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 We provide empirical evidence for the impact of surface processes on the structure of the present-day foreland fold-and-thrust belt of the Himalaya. We have reconstructed and analyzed ten balanced cross sections distributed along the entire length of the Himalayan arc. Here, we focus on the Siwalik Group, which represents the deformed part of the foreland basin and consists of synorogenic Middle Miocene to Pleistocene sediments that form the youngest and frontal part of the Himalayan orogen. We make two important observations: (1) a distinct west-to-east increase in strain and strain rate correlates with plate convergence rates, and (2) belt morphology is inversely correlated with rainfall amount. According to the predictions of the critical taper model, an eastward increase in convergence rate would induce higher rates of material accretion. Thus, the Himalayan fold-and-thrust belt should widen eastward, yet we have observed the opposite. However, higher annual rainfall amounts and specific stream power appear to favor a narrower belt. Thus, we suggest that the morphology of the Himalayan foreland fold-and-thrust belt is controlled primarily by surface processes, in accordance with the critical taper model. 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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".