MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209535832 · doi:10.1134/s1028334x2110010x

Two-Level Subduction in the Upper Mantle as a Mechanism for the Evolution of the Eastern Arctic Lithosphere for the Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous

2021· article· en· W3209535832 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
L. I. Lobkovskiy, С. Д. Соколов, Н. О. Сорохтин, M. V. Kononov

Bibliographic record

VenueDoklady Earth Sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyLithosphereCretaceousPaleontologyArcticSubductionStructural basinCenozoicTectonicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The popular rotational hypothesis of the formation and evolution of the main structures of the Eastern Arctic lithosphere during the Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous, in particular, the opening of the Canadian Basin, the closure of the Angayucham and South Anyui paleoceans, and the formation of collision structures during the movement of the Alaska and Chukotka blocks, is discussed. The difficulties of this hypothesis and other kinematic schemes of the evolution of the Arctic lithosphere are noted, and it is concluded that it is impossible to make a good choice in favor of any model of Arctic evolution within the framework of a purely kinematic approach. A generalization of the basic geodynamic model of Arctic evolution previously developed for the Late Cretaceous and Cenozoic to the earlier period of evolution of the Amerasian Basin in the Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous is proposed.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDoklady Earth SciencesSame topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207