MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997068203

LAB and other lithospheric discontinuities below Cratons

2013· article· en· W2997068203 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Forough Sodoudi

Bibliographic record

VenuePublication Database GFZ (GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCratonGeologyLithosphereClassification of discontinuitiesSeismologyMathematicsTectonicsMathematical analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cratons are extremely stable continental areas of the Earth’s crust, which have been formed and remained largely unchanged since Precambrian. However, their formation and how they survived destruction over billions of years remains a subject of debate. Seismic properties of the cratonic lithosphere re[U+FB02]ect its composition and physical state and obtain basic constraints on processes of the formation and evolution of continents. Insight on these issues may be gained by determining the depth and the nature of the Lithosphere-Asthenosphere Boundary (LAB), which is a necessary element of the plate tectonic theory. However, It has proved quite “elusive” beneath the oldest continental areas. What is missing to date is a consensus on the feature that would correspond to the LAB and whether such a feature exists everywhere beneath cratons. The relatively recently developed S receiver function technique employing S-to-P conversions appears promising for detecting the LAB with a sufficiently high resolution and density. A growing number of regional observations obtained from S receiver function studies has detected discontinuities characterized by a significant negative velocity contrast in the upper mantle. However, challenges still remain in detecting the S-to-P conversions from the LAB beneath the Precambrian cratons. Some recent SRF studies observed a deep (> 160 km) negative velocity contrast beneath cratons and interpreted it as the LAB. For example, a deep LAB at about 250 km was reported beneath the Kalahari craton by different authors. Similar results were also obtained beneath some parts of the Canadian shield, East European Craton, Australia, the Arabian Shield and Tanzania craton. In contrast, other SRF studies found no evidence for negative discontinuities at these depths in the North American craton, in Kalahari craton or in Australia. Instead they revealed a very sharp negative velocity gradient at much shallower depth (60-150 km), leading some authors to infer that the cratonic lithosphere may be considerably thinner than expected, contradicting tomographic and other geophysical or geochemical studies. Moreover, this finding contrasts also with other cratonic regions where SRFs clearly found an observable LAB discontinuity at depths of more than 160 km. To solve this problem, a concept of a “Mid-Lithospheric Discontinuity” (MLD) has been developed. The MLD is proposed as a global characteristic of Precambrian lithosphere, which had been consistently found as the 8_ discontinuity within the continental lithosphere in the analysis of long-range seismic profiles. The nature of the MLD remains, however, uncertain, and may be attributed to accumulated melts, presence of fluids, lithospheric stacking, remnants of fossil subduction interfaces or change in anisotropic properties. Such a feature would have implications for the formation and evolution of the continents. Indeed, issues related to the unambiguous detection of MLD and the controversial LAB beneath the cratonic regions of the globe still remain contentious and therefore further work is required to resolve this issue. I will concentrate on this topic and present some new results from Kalahari craton, Scandinavia and eastern Europe.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.256 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePublication Database GFZ (GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences)Same topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207