Identifying mantle lithosphere inheritance in controlling intraplate orogenesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Crustal inheritance is often considered important in the tectonic evolution of the Wilson Cycle. However, the role of the mantle lithosphere is usually overlooked due to its difficulty to image and uncertainty in rheological makeup. Recently, increased resolution in lithosphere imaging has shown potential scarring in continental mantle lithosphere to be ubiquitous. In our study, we analyze intraplate deformation driven by mantle lithosphere heterogeneities from ancient Wilson Cycle processes and compare this to crustal inheritance deformation. We present 2‐D numerical experiments of continental convergence to generate intraplate deformation, exploring the limits of continental rheology to understand the dominant lithosphere layer across a broad range of geological settings. By implementing a “jelly sandwich” rheology, common in stable continental lithosphere, we find that during compression the strength of the mantle lithosphere is integral in generating deformation from a structural anomaly. We posit that if the continental mantle is the strongest layer within the lithosphere, then such inheritance may have important implications for the Wilson Cycle. Furthermore, our models show that deformation driven by mantle lithosphere scarring can produce tectonic patterns related to intraplate orogenesis originating from crustal sources, highlighting the need for a more formal discussion of the role of the mantle lithosphere in plate tectonics.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".