MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016399428 · doi:10.1111/jmg.12532

Multiple <i>P–T–d–t</i> paths reveal the evolution of the final Nuna assembly in northeast Australia

2020· article· en· W3016399428 on OpenAlexafffund
Silvia Volante, Amaury Pourteau, William J. Collins, Eleanore Blereau, Zheng‐Xiang Li, Matthijs A. Smit, Noreen J. Evans, Adam Nordsvan, Chris J. Spencer, B.J. McDonald, Jiangyu Li, Christina Günter

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Metamorphic Geology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsPacific Institute for the Mathematical SciencesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAustralian Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeologyMetamorphismGeochemistryMetamorphic faciesMetamorphic rockOrogenyGranuliteMonaziteCratonFaciesGreenschistMaficGeochronologyPetrologyZirconGeomorphologyPaleontologyTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The final assembly of the Mesoproterozoic supercontinent Nuna was marked by the collision of Laurentia and Australia at 1.60 Ga, which is recorded in the Georgetown Inlier of NE Australia. Here, we decipher the metamorphic evolution of this final Nuna collisional event using petrostructural analysis, major and trace element compositions of key minerals, thermodynamic modelling, and multi‐method geochronology. The Georgetown Inlier is characterised by deformed and metamorphosed 1.70–1.62 Ga sedimentary and mafic rocks, which were intruded by c . 1.56 Ga old S‐type granites. Garnet Lu–Hf and monazite U–Pb isotopic analyses distinguish two major metamorphic events (M1 at c . 1.60 Ga and M2 at c . 1.55 Ga), which allows at least two composite fabrics to be identified at the regional scale— c . 1.60 Ga S1 (consisting in fabrics S1a and S1b) and c . 1.55 Ga S2 (including fabrics S2a and S2b). Also, three tectono‐metamorphic domains are distinguished: (a) the western domain, with S1 defined by low‐ P ( LP ) greenschist facies assemblages; (b) the central domain, where S1 fabric is preserved as medium‐ P ( MP ) amphibolite facies relicts, and locally as inclusion trails in garnet wrapped by the regionally dominant low‐ P amphibolite facies S2 fabric; and (c) the eastern domain dominated by upper amphibolite to granulite facies S2 foliation. In the central domain, 1.60 Ga MP– medium ‐T (MT) metamorphism (M1) developed within the staurolite–garnet stability field, with conditions ranging from 530 – 550°C at 6 – 7 kbar (garnet cores) to 620 – 650°C at 8 – 9 kbar (garnet rims), and it is associated with S1 fabric. The onset of 1.55 Ga LP– high‐ T ( HT ) metamorphism (M2) is marked by replacement of staurolite by andalusite (M2a/D2a), which was subsequently pseudomorphed by sillimanite (M2b/D2b) where granite and migmatite are abundant. P–T conditions ranged from 600 to 680°C and 4–6 kbar for the M2b sillimanite stage. 1.60 Ga garnet relicts within the S2 foliation highlight the progressive obliteration of the S1 fabric by regional S2 in the central zone during peak M2 metamorphism. In the eastern migmatitic complex, partial melting of paragneiss and amphibolite occurred syn‐ to post ‐ S2, at 730–770°C and 6–8 kbar, and at 750–790°C and 6 kbar, respectively. The pressure–temperature–deformation–time paths reconstructed for the Georgetown Inlier suggest a c . 1.60 Ga M1/D1 event recorded under greenschist facies conditions in the western domain and under medium‐ P and medium‐ T conditions in the central domain. This event was followed by the regional 1.56–1.54 Ga low‐ P and high‐ T phase (M2/D2), extensively recorded in the central and eastern domains. Decompression between these two metamorphic events is ascribed to an episode of exhumation. The two‐stage evolution supports the previous hypothesis that the Georgetown Inlier preserves continental collisional and subsequent thermal perturbation associated with granite emplacement.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.178 · 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.

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

Citations43
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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