MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2515943351 · doi:10.14419/ijag.v4i2.6516

New K–AR ages of tchabal mbabo alkaline volcano massif, Cameroon volcanic line and adamawa plateau (central Africa)

2016· article· en· W2515943351 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Fagny Mefire Aminatou, Nkouandou Oumarou Faarouk, Robert Temdjim, Jacques‐Marie Bardintzeff, Hervé Guillou, Dan Stumbea, Abdelhak Boutaleb

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Advanced Geosciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Universitaire de la Francophonie
KeywordsGeologyGeochemistryMassifVolcanoLavaGeochronologyAmphiboleFractional crystallization (geology)Paleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tchabal Mbabo in Central Africa is a voluminous volcano massif composed of alkali lava series. K-Ar geochronology data obtained from three samples of basanite - trachyandesite composition defined at least two volcanic activities. The first at end Eocene (38.22 ± 0.80 Ma) and the second during Oligocene (28.88 ± 0.61 and 28.60 ± 0.60Ma). The distribution of different ages along the Cameroon Volcanic Line is difficult to council with any migration of magmatic activity, as previously suggested. The most realistic scenario for the formation of Cameroon Line is that the ascent of lavas has been favored by the crustal discontinuities inherited from the Pan-African orogeny and reactivated during Mesozoic and Cenozoic. ICP MS and ICP AES analyses show that basanite lavas are the result of 2 % melting of sub-lithospheric mantle source containing garnet and phlogopite phases; the trachyandesites are formed by fractional crystallization of K-feldspar, amphibole, clinopyroxene and Fe-Ti oxides.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Advanced Geosciences→Same topicGeological and Geochemical Analysis→French-language works237,207→