MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897791207 · doi:10.1130/l1001.1

Time scale for the development of thickened crust in the Cretaceous North Cascades magmatic arc, Washington, and relationship to Cretaceous flare-up magmatism

2018· article· en· W2897791207 on OpenAlexaff
Erin K. Shea, Jonathan S. Miller, Robert B. Miller, Christine F. Chan, Adam J.R. Kent, John M. Hanchar, Kelly Dustin, Scott William Elkins

Bibliographic record

VenueLithosphere · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBatholithGeologyZirconCrustCretaceousContinental crustGeochemistryMagmatismGeochronologyPlutonPaleontologyTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heavy rare earth element (HREE)–depleted trace-element patterns are a relatively common feature of granitoids within mature Cordilleran continental margin arcs (e.g., Sierra Nevada batholith, Coast Mountains batholith, North Cascades, Peninsular Ranges batholith). This depletion is commonly interpreted to indicate the presence of garnet during granitoid melt formation, which requires thick arc crust (>40 km) to achieve the necessary pressure conditions to stabilize garnet in the lower crust. This work focused on understanding the evolution of thickened crust in an ancient continental arc using whole-rock geochemical data, high-precision chemical abrasion–isotope dilution–thermal ionization mass spectrometry (CA-ID-TIMS) U-Pb zircon geochronology, and in situ zircon Hf and O isotopic data from three contemporaneous Cretaceous plutons in the North Cascades of Washington State, USA.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLithosphereSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207