MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2977453820 · doi:10.5194/se-11-397-2020

Uncertainties in break-up markers along the Iberia–Newfoundland margins illustrated by new seismic data

2020· article· en· W2977453820 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSolid Earth · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRoyal Holloway, University of London
KeywordsGeologyLithospherePlate tectonicsRiftMagnetic anomalySeismologyTectonicsOceanic crustContinental marginMantle (geology)CrustPaleontologyAnomaly (physics)GeophysicsSubduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Plate tectonic modellers often rely on the identification of “break-up” markers to reconstruct the early stages of continental separation. Along the Iberian-Newfoundland margin, so-called break-up markers include interpretations of old magnetic anomalies from the M series, as well as the “J anomaly”. These have been used as the basis for plate tectonic reconstructions are based on the concept that these anomalies pinpoint the location of first oceanic lithosphere. However, uncertainties in the location and interpretation of break-up markers, as well as the difficulty in dating them precisely, has led to plate models that differ in both the timing and relative palaeo-positions of Iberia and Newfoundland during separation. We use newly available seismic data from the Southern Newfoundland Basin (SNB) to assess the suitability of commonly used break-up markers along the Newfoundland margin for plate kinematic reconstructions. Our data show that basement associated with the younger M-series magnetic anomalies is comprised of exhumed mantle and magmatic additions and most likely represents transitional domains and not true oceanic lithosphere. Because rifting propagated northward, we argue that M-series anomaly identifications further north, although in a region not imaged by our seismic, are also unlikely to be diagnostic of true oceanic crust beneath the SNB. Similarly, our data also allow us to show that the high amplitude of the J Anomaly is associated with a zone of exhumed mantle punctuated by significant volcanic additions and at times characterized by interbedded volcanics and sediments. Magmatic activity in the SNB at a time coinciding with M4 (128 Ma) and the presence of SDR packages onlapping onto a basement fault suggest that, at this time, plate divergence was still being accommodated by tectonic faulting. We illustrate the differences in the relative positions of Iberia and Newfoundland across published plate reconstructions and discuss how these are a direct consequence of the uncertainties introduced into the modelling procedure by the use of extended continental margin data (dubious magnetic anomaly identifications, break-up unconformity interpretations). We conclude that a different approach is needed for constraining plate kinematics of the Iberian plate pre-M0 times.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.360
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.190 · 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