MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Athabasca Granulite Terrane and Evidence for Dynamic Behavior of Lower Continental Crust

2018· article· en· W2806727799 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gregory Dumond, Michael L. Williams, Sean P. Regan

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGranuliteTerraneContinental crustGeologyCrustFelsicEarth scienceGeochemistryCratonArcheanTectonicsPetrologyPaleontologyMafic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deeply exhumed granulite terranes have long been considered nonrepresentative of lower continental crust largely because their bulk compositions do not match the lower crustal xenolith record. A paradigm shift in our understanding of deep crust has since occurred with new evidence for a more felsic and compositionally heterogeneous lower crust than previously recognized. The >20,000-km 2 Athabasca granulite terrane locally provides a >700-Myr-old window into this type of lower crust, prior to being exhumed and uplifted to the surface between 1.9 and 1.7 Ga. We review over 20 years of research on this terrane with an emphasis on what these findings may tell us about the origin and behavior of lower continental crust, in general, in addition to placing constraints on the tectonic evolution of the western Canadian Shield between 2.6 and 1.7 Ga. The results reveal a dynamic lower continental crust that evolved compositionally and rheologically with time.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.365
Threshold uncertainty score0.726

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.249 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Earth and Planetary SciencesSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207