MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tantalising new magnetic views of Precambrian and Pan-African age crustal architecture in interior East Antarctica

2020· article· en· W3092346531 on OpenAlexaff
Fausto Ferraccioli, Graeme Eagles, Alexander Golynsky, Jörg Ebbing, Guochao Wu, Chris Green, B. M. Eglington, Egidio Armadillo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPolar Research and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGondwanaSupercontinentGeologyRodiniaLithosphereTectonicsPaleontologyPrecambrianOutcropPlate tectonicsEarth scienceCraton

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

East Antarctica is the least understood continent on Earth due to its vast size, major ice sheet cover and remoteness. Coastal outcrops and glacial erratics have yielded cryptic but nevertheless fascinating clues into up to 3 billion years of East Antarctica’s geological and tectonic evolution. These geological constraints represent in turn the pillars to address global geodynamic linkages between East Antarctica, Australia, India, South Africa and Laurentia in the growth, assembly and dispersal of Gondwana, Rodinia and Nuna during the complex evolution of Earth's supercontinent cycles. However, due to the lack of drilling, our ability to project, test and augment such supercontinental linkages and several speculative geological interpretations in the interior of the continent beneath the East Antarctic Ice Sheet remains very limited. While airborne and satellite gravity data and seismology are providing key new constraints on crustal and lithosphere thickness and help unveil large-scale heterogeneity in the East Antarctic lithosphere, detailed imaging of the architecture of individual crustal domains and their tectonic boundaries relies critically on magnetic anomaly data interpretation. Here we exploit ongoing analyses of a recent continental-scale magnetic anomaly compilation (ADMAP 2.0) (Golynsky et al., 2018, GRL) augmented by major new datasets we recently collected, processed and compiled over the Recovery and South Pole frontiers and enhanced satellite magnetic imaging to: 1) reveal a more complex mosaic of distinct but in several places still cryptic Precambrian crustal provinces that represent the building blocks of interior East Antarctica; 2) provide new geophysical constraints that can be used to test different hypotheses of East-West Gondwana amalgamation along several candidate suture zones, including in particular the Shackleton suture zone, which provides a unique window on several distinct Precambrian terranes at the inferred leading edge of the composite Mawson Continent, as well as unique occurrences of Pan-African age rocks of ophiolitic affinity and 3) re-assess potential paths and the significance of the Kuunga suture zone between Greater India and East Antarctica and re-evaluate the tectonic origin of a major magnetic and gravity lineament previously thought to delineate the Indo-Australo-Antarctic suture and finally 4) propose new surveys in other frontier regions including in particular the under-explored interior of Princess Elizabeth Land and Recovery Subglacial Highlands that are critical in order to test the possible connectivity of the Kuunga, Gamburstev and potentially also Shackleton suture zones. Finally, we showcase examples of how we are combining aeromagnetic and gravity interpretations for East Antarctica with global magnetic and gravity datasets, geochronology, geochemistry, geology, tectonics and paleomagnetic data in an evolving plate kinematic framework (in GPlates) to re-assess supercontinent reconstructions with particular emphasis so far on Nuna and Gondwana.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

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 studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPolar Research and EcologyFrench-language works237,207