MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W313905095

Deformation Fabrics and Their Cross-Cutting Relationships in the Central Uplifts of Large Impact Structures

2009· article· en· W313905095 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLPI · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImpact craterBrecciaGeologyImpact structureDeformation (meteorology)Shock metamorphismFault (geology)Shock (circulatory)SeismologyPetrologyGeochemistryGeometryAstrobiologyPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Previous work on smaller complex craters less than 20 km in diameter [1-4] has uncovered a petrogenetic (deformation/modification) sequence expressed by cross-cutting relationships between deformation fabrics in target rocks. This sequence is most apparent in the uplifted rocks of crater floors (i.e. central peaks/uplifts). The deformation fabrics that have been studied include macroand micro-indicators of shock metamorphism, such as shatter cones and planar deformation features. In addition, microfractures (mfrs), microfaults (mfs), major faults, and polyand monomictic fault breccias have been observed and related to individual impact events [1-4]. These deformational fabrics consistently occur in specific crosscutting relationships that correspond to the stages of an impact event. This earlier work was limited to complex craters instead of simple craters because of the uplift component (which was found to produce added impact deformational fabrics, such as major faults) in the former type. The restriction to smaller (<20 km diameter) complex craters resulted from background research that indicated that other fabrics such as “pseudotachylites” (pts) or “pseudotachylitic breccias” (pbs) have been observed in craters larger than ~ 20 km [Milam, unpublished data] and that cross-cutting relationships between different “generations” of purported pts were complex and not clearly established [5-7]. New field and remote sensing observations demonstrate that deformational fabrics that occur in central uplifts of smaller complex craters are also common in larger terrestrial impact structures. Likewise, these deformational fabrics exhibit similar cross-cutting relationships that support the notion that the same petrogenetic sequence [8] occurs in larger diameter craters. Methods: Preliminary field observations were made of the centers of the 54 km diameter Charlevoix impact structure in Quebec, Canada and ~300 km diameter Vredefort impact structure in South Africa during 2007-2008. Deformation fabrics were observed, characterized, and measured while in the field and in hand specimen. Results: In addition to shatter cones (which have already been observed in both structures by other workers [9-10]), other deformational fabrics, identical to those observed in the central uplifts of smaller complex craters were observed. Mfrs and mfs have been observed in both the sedimentary and igneous target rocks of both Charlevoix and Vredefort. Similar to prior observations, mfs exhibit minimal (cm-scale) offsets and occur in parallel and sympathetic sets. As at smaller impact sites, most mfs are normal faults. Major faults have been inferred or observed by the author and others at each site. Fault breccias however, are not as well-exposed. At Vredefort, it is suspected that some of the pseudotachylitic breccias occur along major faults. Cross-Cutting Relationships: Mfs and mfrs were observed cutting across pre-existing sedimentary features and igneous textures in target rocks (Figs. 1-4). At Charlevoix, shatter cone surfaces were observed offset by mf movement (Fig. 4). Both observations are consistent with the early stages of the petrogenetic sequence expressed in smaller craters [8]. They suggest that rock failure occurred following deposition/emplacement and with or after shock wave passage (post contact/compression). Mf offset of shatter cone surfaces further suggests activation of mfrs as target rock is compressed/decompressed and transported during the ejection/excavation stage of impact.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.254 · 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