MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2992721950 · doi:10.5539/jgg.v11n4p13

Geochemical Characterization of Boula Ibi Granitoids and Implications in Geodynamic Evolution

2019· article· en· W2992721950 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jean Paul Sep Nlomngan, Joseph Pénaye, Rigobert Tchameni, Sébastien Owona, Augustin Patrice Moussango Ibohn, E.N. Nsifa, Toteu Sadrack Félix

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geography and Geology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyGeochemistryPartial meltingFractional crystallization (geology)Mantle (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Petrographical and geochemical study, consistent with observed field relations show that the Boula Ibi syn- and post-kinematic granitoids in north Cameroon, occurred in banded gneisses. These syn- and post-kinematic granitoids consist of deformed monzonites typified by its granoblastic texture, diorites, syenites, granites and basic xenoliths of dioritic and monzonitic composition. They are calc-alkaline, hyperpotassic, metaluminous to slightly peraluminous and I-Type granitoids. They display high content in Fe2O3 + MgO + CaO (2.16 – 23.24 %) that reveals their intermediate affinity, magnesian and metaluminous character whilst the low A/CNK (< 1.1) content indicates their mantle origin. Harker diagrams and La/Sm vs La define the fractional crystallization and partial melting as the two main processes that led the geodynamic evolution of the Boula Ibi syn- and post-kinematic granitoids. These are consistent with low-content of Cs, Ta, Nb, Tb and Hf, supporting high melting rates ranging between 20 and 40% as well as molar Al2O3/(MgO + FeOt) vs CaO/(MgO + FeOt) plot showing magmatic evolutions from metabasaltic and metagreywackes sources.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geography and GeologySame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207