MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2909939275 · doi:10.4095/212673

U-Pb zircon age and regional setting of the Lapeyrère gabbronorite, Portneuf-Mauricie region, south-central Grenville Province, Quebec; Radiogenic age and isotopic studies: Report 14

2001· report· en· W2909939275 on OpenAlexaffabout
L Nadeau, O van Breemen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZirconRadiogenic nuclideGeologyGeochemistryMantle (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-grade tectonite bodies of the Portneuf Mauricie region were intruded by a number of small and scattered, late Grenvillian, mid-crustal gabbroic intrusions. These consist chiefly of fresh and massive gabbro and gabbronorite with well preserved igneous mineral textures, to locally recrystallized and foliated gneissic equivalents. The Lapeyrère gabbronorite is the largest of these intrusions. Uranium-lead dating of igneous zircon crystals gives a crystallization age at 1069 ± 2 Ma, close to ages previously reported for the Shawinigan gabbronorite, and two small gabbroic intrusions in Canton Taché, along the southern margin of the Lac-Saint-Jean anorthosite complex. Although modest in size, these distant intrusions signal a regionally extensive gabbroic intrusive event in the 1080 1067 Ma interval, at the onset of widespread granitoid plutonism in the south-central Grenville Province. The almost complete absence of anorthosite and the limited volume of gabbroic rocks, appear, however, to set apart this 1080 1067 Ma gabbroic pulse from those leading to classic anorthosite-mangerite-charnockite-granite (AMCG) association.

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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations4
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological and Geochemical Analysis→French-language works237,207→