Heat Generation in Cratonic Mantle Roots—New Trace Element Constraints From Mantle Xenoliths and Implications for Cratonic Geotherms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Heat generation within the cratonic lithospheric mantle (CLM) is an important but poorly determined parameter for constructing cratonic geotherms. Direct measurement of heat producing element (HPE: K, U, and Th) concentrations in bulk‐rock samples of cratonic mantle roots—provided as xenoliths in volcanic rocks such as kimberlites—is mostly compromised by infiltration of host melt into the xenoliths, resulting in over‐estimates of heat production. Here we use in situ methods (laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry) on minerals from a variety of cratonic mantle peridotites to avoid host‐magma contamination enabling new, more accurate determinations of heat production for a wide spectrum of model mantle lithologies. The most melt‐depleted, least metasomatized peridotites indicate that heat generation in un‐metasomatized depleted cratonic lithospheric mantle is negligible, at ∼0.00004 µW/m 3 , 10 2 to 10 3 times less than models that use more enriched or metasomatized compositions. Refertilized cratonic peridotites, typical of many kimberlite hosted xenoliths, have more elevated, but still low heat generation, of 0.006 µW/m 3 . We propose that the heat generation of typical cratonic mantle peridotite lies between these two bounds, that is, between 0.00004 and 0.006 µW/m 3 . Both values produce lower estimates of lithospheric thickness, by ∼10 to up to 80 km, depending on model assumptions, than estimates using higher HPE concentrations measured on bulk‐rock xenolith material.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 teacher head, 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".