MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022814178 · doi:10.1144/jgs2019-199

The Atud gabbro–diorite complex: glimpse of the Cryogenian mixing, assimilation, storage and homogenization zone beneath the Eastern Desert of Egypt

2020· article· en· W3022814178 on OpenAlexaff
Robert J. Stern, Kamal A. Ali, Paul D. Asimow, Mokhles K. Azer, Matthew I. Leybourne, Heba S. Mubarak, Minghua Ren, Rolf L. Romer, Martin J. Whitehouse

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Geological Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersDirectorate for Geosciences
KeywordsGeologyGabbroDioriteGeochemistryPaleontologyIgneous rockTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We analysed gabbroic and dioritic rocks from the Atud igneous complex in the Eastern Desert of Egypt to understand better the formation of juvenile continental crust of the Arabian–Nubian Shield. Our results show that the rocks are the same age (U–Pb zircon ages of 694.5 ± 2.1 Ma for two diorites and 695.3 ± 3.4 Ma for one gabbronorite). These are partial melts of the mantle and related fractionates (εNd 690 = +4.2 to +7.3, 87 Sr/ 86 Sr i = 0.70246–0.70268, zircon δ 18 O ∼ +5‰). Trace element patterns indicate that Atud magmas formed above a subduction zone as part of a large and long-lived ( c . 60 myr) convergent margin. Atud complex igneous rocks belong to a larger metagabbro–epidiorite–diorite complex that formed as a deep crustal mush into which new pulses of mafic magma were periodically emplaced, incorporated and evolved. The petrological evolution can be explained by fractional crystallization of mafic magma plus variable plagioclase accumulation in a mid- to lower crustal MASH zone. The Atud igneous complex shows that mantle partial melting and fractional crystallization and plagioclase accumulation were important for Cryogenian crust formation in this part of the Arabian–Nubian Shield. Supplementary material: Analytical methods and data, calculated equilibrium mineral temperatures, results of petrogenetic modeling, and cathodluminesence images of zircons can be found at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.4958822

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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations27
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Geological SocietySame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207