Thermo‐mechanical interaction of a large impact melt sheet with adjacent target rock, Sudbury impact structure, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The 1.85 Ga Sudbury Igneous Complex (SIC) and its thermal aureole are unique on Earth with regard to unraveling the effects of a large impact melt sheet on adjacent target rocks. Notably, the formation of Footwall Breccia, lining the basal SIC, remains controversial and has been attributed to impact, cratering, and postcratering processes. Based on detailed field mapping and microstructural analysis of thermal aureole rocks, we identified three distinct zones characterized by static recrystallization, incipient melting, and crystallization textures. The temperature gradient in the thermal aureole increases toward the SIC and culminates in a zone of partial melting, which correlates spatially with the Footwall Breccia. We therefore conclude that assimilation of target rock into initially superheated impact melt and simultaneous deformation after cratering strongly contributed to breccia formation. Estimated melt fractions of the Footwall Breccia amount to 80 vol% and attest to an extreme loss in mechanical strength and, thus, high mobility of the Breccia during assimilation. Transport of highly mobile Footwall Breccia material into the overlying Sublayer Norite of the SIC and vice versa can be attributed to Raleigh–Taylor instability of both units, long‐term crater modification caused by viscous relaxation of crust underlying the Sudbury impact structure, or both.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".