THE CONTROVERSIAL GRANITE CONTROVERSY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The granite controversy could be said to be fought to a draw. As many other rocks have given up their secrets via experiment and field work over the years, the result of searching for an igneous or metamorphic origin for granite has resulted in a spectrum of answers. The earliest origin conundrum courtesy of J. Hutton and A.G. Werner in the 18th century, was via fusion from heat or crystallization from solution. Quartz, the most difficult of granite minerals, could not be fused, but could be, and was, put into solution and crystallized out. Hutton's field evidence at Glen Tilt did not convince everyone. Differences of melting temperatures of quartz and feldspar indicated that quartz should crystallize first, but instead feldspar is defined, with quartz fitted around it. The laboratory could not produce granite melt or texture, but because of the laboratory work of R. Kirwan and others, Werner's theory of solution origin for granite and basalt retained meaning well into the 19th century. Gneisses and schists, with approximately granite composition, were a problem: the category of metamorphic was added, especially by C. Lyell. Whether foliation was a product of altered sedimentary layers or deformation by pressure (or both) was a question. Field work in Canada showed foliated metamorphic rocks interleaved with sedimentary rocks. The increasing use of thin sections posed many conundrums. As well, the existence of a granitic magma was questioned despite great granite plutons on several continents. A partial metamorphic origin was suggested, and the stage was set for the controversies of the late 19th century and through the 20th. Granite could not be synthesized from its constituents either by fusion or in the presence of water. Field work showed it often graded into gneisses. Sometimes granite intrusions didn't deform surrounding rocks, leading to the "space problem." While there were many geologists intrigued with the problems, some prominent players were N.L. Bowen with his crystallization differentiation, the well-recorded evolution of H.H. Read's ideas, H.S. Yoder's experimental work, and W.S. Pitcher's thoughtful evaluation of field sites. Words that came into use included migma and migmatite.
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 | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.004 |
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".