MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912997533 · doi:10.1111/ter.12374

Deformation at the eastern margin of the Northern Canadian Cordillera: Potentially related to opening of the North Atlantic

2019· article· en· W2912997533 on OpenAlexaffabout
Eva Enkelmann, Emily S. Finzel, Jeanette C. Arkle

Bibliographic record

VenueTerra Nova · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyCratonMargin (machine learning)CenozoicMesozoicDeformation (meteorology)PaleontologySeismologyNorth American PlateFront (military)Passive marginPlate tectonicsTectonicsOceanographyStructural basinRift

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Northern Canadian Cordillera (NCC) comprises the Mackenzie Mountains, which are characterized by earthquakes occurring ~1,000 km east of the western North American margin. However, no recognized convergence has occurred in this inboard region since the Mesozoic to early Cenozoic formation of the Cordillera. This lack of an obvious driver for the modern NCC deformation has generated considerable debate and various geodynamic models. We show here thermal histories derived from (U‐Th‐Sm)/He data that are interpreted to indicate reactivated deformation and formation of the eastern deformation front beginning ~30 Ma. At that time the western margin of North America was mainly a transform boundary, which typically transmits very limited amount of stress into the continent. Along the northeastern margin of North America, however, the North Atlantic was opening and may have caused horizontal forces that drove deformation far to the west where the rigid craton encountered the weak Cordillera.

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)0.001
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 score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.154

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.165 · 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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTerra NovaSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207