Lateral crustal flow along discrete flat-lying lower crustal shear zones during Archean continent construction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nature of lithospheric evolution and style of the driving ‘tectonic’ processes occurring during Archean continent construction remain enigmatic. A significantly hotter thermal regime characterised the early Earth and was pervasive for much of the Archean. This resulted in construction of continents that were significantly weaker and unable to support the thick crustal sequences and topographies common to modern orogens. Gravitational collapse of these early continents may have occurred when deeper material became less dense by heating or partial melting and created a density contrast beyond the crustal competence and/or due to post-orogenic relaxation. Such a collapse could result in large scale horizontal spreading within the middle to lower crust and the development of lateral crustal flow along flat-lying shear zones producing fluid-deposited graphitic and metallic sulphide films at these depths, which, if preserved would produce broad scale quasi-horizontal mid-lower crustal low resistivity anomalies. Here we show 3D magnetotelluric resistivity models of the Archean Superior Province of Canada that reveal these types of anomalies that could represent lateral crustal flow in the middle to lower crust. Further, the magnetotelluric model shows narrow sub-vertical zones of low resistivity extending from the mid crust to the near surface, interpreted to represent remnant fluid pathways that potentially formed prior to gravitational collapse. These sub-vertical low resistivity features correlate spatially with crustal-scale deformation zones that potentially are host to hydrothermal ore deposits and abundant metasomatic mineral assemblages. The well preserved record of primary crustal amalgamation within the Superior Province of Canada with both features expected of autochthonous vertical ‘drip’ tectonics (sub-vertical fluid pathways) and allochthonous horizontal plate tectonics (flat-lying lower crustal shear zones) regimes, suggests a potential transitional period of tectonic evolution might have characterised the region during the late Archean.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".