MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2582768536 · doi:10.1130/g38810.1

Location, location, location: The variable lifespan of the Laramide orogeny

2017· article· en· W2582768536 on OpenAlexafffund
Peter Copeland, Claire A. Currie, Timothy F. Lawton, Michael A. Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenueGeology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDalhousie UniversityCompute Canada
KeywordsLibrary scienceOrogenyHistoryGeologyComputer sciencePaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Laramide orogeny had a spatially variable lifespan, which we explain using a geodynamic model that incorporates onset and demise of flat-slab subduction. Laramide shortening and attendant uplift began in southeast California (USA) at ca. 90 Ma, swept to the northeast to arrive in the Black Hills of South Dakota (USA) at ca. 60 Ma, and concluded in South Dakota within ∼10 m.y. During subsequent slab rollback, the areal extent of Laramide deformation decreased as the eastern edge of active deformation retreated to the southwest rapidly from ca. 55 to 45 Ma and more slowly from ca. 45 to 40 Ma, with deformation ultimately ceasing in the southwestern part of the orogen at ca. 30 Ma. Geodynamic modeling of this process suggests that changes in the strength of the North America plate and densification of the Farallon plate played important roles in controlling the areal extent of the Laramide orogen and hence the lifespan of the orogenic event at any particular location in western North America.

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)0.001
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations150
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeologySame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207