MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2992727488 · doi:10.1111/ter.12445

Detrital zircon geochronology analysis of the Late Mesozoic deposition in the Turpan‐Hami basin: Implications for the uplift history of the Eastern Tian Shan, north‐western China

2019· article· en· W2992727488 on OpenAlexaff
Tianyi Shen, Yue Chen, Guocan Wang, Junliang Ji, Yong Wang, Pan Zhang, Paul Sotiriou, Rong Guo, Zezhuang Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueTerra Nova · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China-Yunnan Joint FundChina Geological Survey
KeywordsGeologyProvenanceZirconGeochronologyCretaceousPaleontologyPermianMesozoicStructural basinGeochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Analysing the provenance changes of synorogenic sediments in the Turpan‐Hami basin by detrital zircon geochronology is an efficient tool to examine the uplift and erosion history of the easternmost Tian Shan. We present detrital zircon U‐Pb analysis from nine samples that were collected within marginal lacustrine Middle‐Late Jurassic and aeolian‐fluvial Early Cretaceous strata in the basin. Middle‐Early Jurassic (159–172 Ma) zircons deriving from the southern Junggar dominated the Middle Jurassic sample from the western Turpan‐Hami basin, whereas Permian‐Carboniferous (270–330 Ma) zircons from the Bogda mountains were dominant in the Late Jurassic to Early Cretaceous samples. Devonian‐Silurian (400–420 Ma) and Triassic (235–259 Ma) zircons from the Jueluotage and Harlik mountains constituted the subordinate age groups in the Late Jurassic and Early Cretaceous samples from the eastern basin respectively. These provenance transitions provide evidence for uplift of the Bogda mountains in the Late Jurassic and the Harlik mountains since the Early Cretaceous.

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)0.000
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations24
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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