MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2788422104 · doi:10.1130/g39864.1

Timing and mechanism of the rise of the Shillong Plateau in the Himalayan foreland

2018· article· en· W2788422104 on OpenAlexaff
Gwladys Govin, Yani Najman, Alex Copley, Ian Millar, Peter van der Beek, Pascale Huyghe, Djordje Grujić, Jesse Davenport

Bibliographic record

VenueGeology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
Topicearthquake and tectonic studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilEuropean CommissionSight Research UK
KeywordsForeland basinGeologyPlateau (mathematics)LithosphereTectonicsStructural basinGeomorphologySedimentary rockFault (geology)PaleontologySeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Shillong Plateau (northeastern India) constitutes the only significant topography in the Himalayan foreland. Knowledge of its surface uplift history is key to understanding topographic development and unraveling tectonic–climate–topographic coupling in the eastern Himalaya. We use the sedimentary record of the Himalayan foreland basin north of the Shillong Plateau to show that the paleo-Brahmaputra river was redirected north and west by the rising plateau at 5.2–4.9 Ma. We suggest that onset of plateau uplift is a result of increased fault-slip rates in response to stresses caused by the Indian lithosphere bending beneath the Himalaya.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.207
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 teacher head, 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

Citations84
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeologySame topicearthquake and tectonic studiesFrench-language works237,207