MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3132851765 · doi:10.1029/2020gl091508

Mercury Evidence of Intense Volcanism Preceded Oceanic Anoxic Event 1d

2021· article· en· W3132851765 on OpenAlexaff
Hanwei Yao, Xi Chen, Runsheng Yin, Stephen E. Grasby, Helmut Weissert, Xue Gu, Chengshan Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVolcanismGeologyAnoxic watersVolcanoMercury (programming language)Large igneous provinceIgneous rockGeochemistryEarth sciencePaleontologyOceanographyTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Geochemical studies of marine sediments indicate that most Oceanic Anoxic Events (OAEs) appear coincident with Large Igneous Province (LIP) volcanism. OAE 1d records peculiar paleoceanographic changes and global carbon cycle perturbations, however, its association with volcanism has not yet been supported by robust geochemical evidence. To examine the potential role of volcanism we investigated the mercury (Hg) concentration and isotopic record of OAE 1d interval at the Youxia section, southern Tibet. The interval prior to OAE 1d is marked by a combined positive Δ199Hg and Hg content shift, which suggests a volcanic Hg source. These findings are consistence with a prominent increase in sea surface temperatures and atmospheric CO2 before OAE 1d. We suggest that eruption of the central portion of the Kerguelen LIP may have been the main source of the Hg anomaly and resulted in global environment perturbations that drove the onset of the anoxia event.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Citations36
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207