MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2518842035 · doi:10.1130/2016.2522(10)

Mafic magmatism in the Belt-Purcell Basin and Wyoming Province of western Laurentia

2016· book-chapter· en· W2518842035 on OpenAlexaff
Chris Rogers, Alana Mackinder, Richard E. Ernst, Brian Cousens

Bibliographic record

VenueGeological Society of America Special Papers · 2016
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaficIgneous rockGeologyLarge igneous provinceLaurentiaGeochemistryProterozoicMagmatismPaleontologyPaleozoic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proterozoic mafic magmatic rocks exposed along the western side of North America, or western Laurentia, from Kimberley, British Columbia, through to northwestern Wyoming have been previously divided into two large igneous provinces: the ca. 1460 Ma Moyie-Purcell and the ca. 780 Ma Gunbarrel large igneous provinces. New geochemical analysis from this study demonstrates that there are additional intraplate mafic magmatic rocks present. Distinguishable by variable normalized rare earth element patterns combined with differing slopes on a binary Ti versus V plot, there are 17 identifiable geochemical signatures in the 307 whole-rock and trace-element analyses from this study. Only seven of these signatures can be linked to the ca. 1460 Ma Moyie-Purcell large igneous province, and one signature to the 780 Ma Gunbarrel large igneous province. This study has identified two groups of intrusions with distinct geochemical signatures previously linked with the ca. 1460 Ma Moyie-Purcell large igneous province but now recognized to be separate events, a single unique geochemical signature with a U-Pb age correlative with the Moyie-Purcell large igneous province and seven other heretofore unidentified signatures interpreted to belong to additional undated events.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.840
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.168 · 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.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeological Society of America Special PapersSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207