Synthesis of palaeomagnetic datasets suggests that the geomagnetic field was persistently non-uniformitarian in the Devonian
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Devonian has long been a problematic era for paleomagnetism. Devonian data are generally difficult to interpret and have complex partial or full overprints. These problems arise from paleomagnetic data obtained from both sedimentary and igneous rocks. As a result, the reconstruction of motions of tectonic plates is often troubling, as these rely on apparent polar wander paths constructed from Devonian paleomagnetic poles. Also the geomagnetic polarity time scale for this time period is poorly constrained. Paleointensity studies suggest that the field was much weaker than the field of today, and it has been hypothesised that this was accompanied by many polarity reversals (a hyperreversing field). We review studies on Devonian paleopoles, magnetostratigraphy and paleointensity. We tentatively suggest that the field during the Devonian might have been so weak and perhaps of a non-dipolar configuration, that obtaining reliable paleomagnetic data from Devonian rocks is extremely difficult. In order to push forward the understanding of the Devonian field, we emphasise the need for studies to provide fully accessible data down to specimen level demagnetisation diagrams. Incorporating all data, no matter how complex or bad they might seem, is the only way to advance the understanding of the Devonian magnetic field. Recent paleointensity studies appear to suggest that the Devonian and Ediacaran were both extreme weak field intervals. For the Ediacaran, it has been hypothesised that the field had an impact on life on earth. A fundamentally weak and perhaps non-dipolar field during the Devonian might have had an influence on evolution and extinctions. As there is a large number of biological crises in the Devonian, we here pose the question whether the Earth’s magnetic field was a contributing factor to these crises. New independent evidence from the Devonian-Carboniferous boundary suggests that the Hangenberg event was caused by increased UV-B radiation, which is in line with a weak magnetic field.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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".