MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035084062

Lithospheric models of the North American continent

2015· article· en· W3035084062 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Magdala Tesauro, Mikhail K. Kaban, Walter D. Mooney, Sierd Cloetingh

Bibliographic record

VenuePublication Database GFZ (GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyLithosphereSeismologyTectonics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We constructed NACr14, a 3D model of the North American (NA) crust, based on the most recent seismic data\nfrom the USGS database. In comparison with the global crustal model CRUST 1.0, NACr14 is more heterogeneous,\nshowing a larger spatial variability of the thickness and average velocities of the crustal layers. Velocities of the\nlower crust vary in a larger range than those of the other layers, while the thickness of all the three layers is on\naverage between 11 and 13 km. The largest velocities of the crystalline crust (>6.6 km/s) reflect the presence\nof a 7.x layer (>7.0 km/s) in the lowermost part of the crust. Using NACr2014, a regional (NA07) and a global\n(SL201sv) tomography model, and gravity data, we apply an iterative technique, which jointly interprets seismic\ntomography and gravity data, to estimate temperature and compositional variations in the NA upper mantle. The\nresults obtained demonstrate that temperature of the cratonic mantle is up to 150C higher than when using a\nuniform compositional model. The differences between the two tomography models influence the results more\nstrongly than possible changes of the depth distribution of compositional variations. Strong negative compositional\ndensity anomalies, corresponding to Mg # >92, characterize the upper mantle of the northwestern part of the\nSuperior craton and the central part of the Slave and Churchill craton. The Proterozoic upper mantle of the western\nand more deformed part of the NA cratons, appears weakly depleted (Mg# 91) when NA07 is used, in agreement\nwith the results based on the interpretation of xenolith data. When we use SL2013sv, the same areas are locally\ncharacterized by high density bodies, which might be interpreted as the effect due to fragments of subducted\nslabs, as those close to the suture of the Appalachians and Grenville province. We used the two thermal models to\nestimate the integrated strength and the effective elastic thickness (Te) of the lithosphere. In the peripheral parts\nof the cratons, as the Proterozoic Canadian Platform and Grenville, the integrated strength for model NA07 is ten\ntimes larger than in model SL2013sv, due to a model-dependent temperature difference of >200°C in the uppermost\nmantle. In both models, Proterozoic regions reactivated by Meso-Cenozoic tectonics (e.g., Rocky Mountains and\nthe Mississippi Embayment) show a weak lithosphere due to the absence of the mechanically strong part of the\nmantle lithospheric layer. Intraplate earthquakes are distributed along the edges of the cratons, characterized by a\nweak lithosphere or pronounced variations in integrated lithospheric strength and Te. In addition, the sum of the\nseismic moments shows that most of the energy is released by the weak lithosphere. These results suggest that the\nedges of the cratons are more prone to accumulation of tectonic stress and subsequent release by earthquakes, in\ncomparison with the stable cratonic regions which resist deformation.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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