Preferred orientation distribution of shock‐induced planar microstructures in quartz and feldspar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shocked quartz and feldspar grains commonly exhibit planar microstructures, such as planar fractures, planar deformation features, and possibly microtwins, which are considered to have formed by shock metamorphism. Their orientation and frequency are typically reported to be randomly distributed across a sample. The goal of this study is to investigate whether such microstructures are completely random within a given sample, or whether their orientation might also retain information on the direction of the local shock wave propagation. For this work, we selected samples of shatter cones, which were cut normal to the striated surface and the striation direction, from three impact structures (Keurusselkä, Finland, and Charlevoix and Manicouagan, Canada). These samples show different stages of pre-impact tectonic deformation. Additionally, we investigated several shocked granite samples, selected at different depths along the drill core recovered during the joint IODP-ICDP Chicxulub Expedition 364 (Mexico). In this case, thin sections were cut along two orthogonal directions, one parallel and one normal to the drill core axis. All the results refer to optical microscopy and universal-stage analyses performed on petrographic thin sections. Our results show that such shock-related microstructures do have a preferred orientation, but also that relating their orientation with the possible shock wave propagation is quite challenging and potentially impossible. This is largely due to the lack of dedicated experiments to provide a key to interpret the observed preferred orientation and to the lack of information on postimpact orientation modifications, especially in the case of the drill core samples.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".