Bibliographic record
Abstract
The NE American margin represents one of the best studied margins in the world, it was the subject of several scientific programs. In comparison, the conjugate NW African margin remains fairly unknown, only two deep seismic cruises were acquired: the SISMAR cruise (2001) offshore the Meseta and the DAKHLA cruise (2002) offshore the Sahara. The deep structure of the Canadian margin is known due to the SMART wide-angle seismic profiles 1, 2 and 3. The first objective of the MIRROR project was to acquire combined wide-angle and deep reflection seismic data offshore a segment conjugate to the SMART-1 profile. The comparison between the homologous segments of these two margins aimed to better understand the opening mechanism of the Central Atlantic Ocean. A comparison between Sismar, Dakhla and Mirror models shows that the continental crust is thicker in the north and thins toward the south. The width of the transition zone is narrower south and Sismar profiles are located on a sedimentary basin placed on a very thinned continental crust. Comparing the Mirror profile with that of the Canadian conjugate margin (Smart 1) shows that the thickness, the structure of the continental crust and the thinning is very similar. However, zones of exhumed and serpentinized mantle were imaged along the Canadian profile that have no conjugate on the African margin. Moreover, the thickness of the oceanic crust is variable with 8 km on the African side and only 3-4 km on the Canadian margin. Several hypotheses have been proposed to explain this difference (a) an age difference between the two types of crust (b) thickening associated with the passage of the Canary hotspot (c) an asymmetric accretion or (d) an accretion at slow to ultra-slow speading centers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".