Megathrust Heterogeneity, Crustal Accretion, and a Topographic Embayment in Western Nepal Himalaya: Insights from the Inversion of Thermochronological Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Between 81º30’ E and 83ºE the Himalayan range’s “perfect” arcuate shape is interrupted by an embayment. We hypothesize that thrust geometry and duplexing along the megathrust at mid-lower crustal depths plays a leading role in growth of the embayment as well the southern margin of the Tibetan plateau. To test this hypothesis, we conducted thermokinematic modeling of published thermochronologic data from the topographic and structural embayment in the western Nepal Himalaya to investigate the three-dimensional geometry and kinematics of the megathrust at mid-lower crustal depths. Models that can best reproduce observed cooling ages suggest that the megathrust in the western Nepal Himalaya is best described as two ramps connected by a long flat that extends further north than in segments to the east and west. These models suggest that the high-slope zone along the embayment lies above the foreland limb of an antiformal crustal accretion zone on the megathrust with lateral and oblique ramps at mid-lower crustal depths. The lateral and oblique ramps may have initiated by ca. 10 Ma. This process may have controlled along-strike variation in Himalayan-plateau growth and therefore development of the topographic embayment. Finally, we analyze geological and morphologic features and propose an evolution model in which landscape and drainage systems across the central-western Himalaya evolve in response to crustal accretion at depth and the three-dimensional geometry of the megathrust. Our work highlights the importance of crustal accretion at different depths in orogenic-wedge growth and that the mid-lower crustal accretion determines the location of plateau edge.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".