Mafic High‐Pressure Rocks Are Preferentially Exhumed From Warm Subduction Settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The oceanic crust that enters a subduction zone is generally recycled to great depth. In rare and punctuated episodes, however, blueschists and eclogites derived from subducted oceanic crust are exhumed. Compilations of the maximum pressure‐temperature conditions in exhumed rocks indicate significantly warmer conditions than those predicted by thermal models. This could be due to preferential exhumation of rocks from hotter conditions that promote greater fluid productivity, mobility, and buoyancy. Alternatively, the models might underestimate the forearc temperatures by neglecting certain heat sources. We compare two sets of global subduction zone thermal models to the rock record. We find that the addition of reasonable amounts of shear heating leads to less than 50 °C heating of the oceanic crust compared to models that exclude this heat source. Models for young oceanic lithosphere tend to agree well with the rock record. We test the hypothesis that certain heat sources may be missing in the models by constructing a global set of models that have high arbitrary heat sources in the forearc. Models that satisfy the rock record in this manner, however, fail to satisfy independent geophysical and geochemical observations. These combined tests show that the average exhumed mafic rock record is systematically warmer than the average thermal structure of mature modern subduction zones. We infer that typical blueschists and eclogites were exhumed preferentially under relatively warm conditions that occurred due to the subduction of young oceanic lithosphere or during the warmer initial stages of subduction.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".