MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200499121 · doi:10.5194/gchron-2021-29-ac2

Reply on RC2

2021· peer-review· en· W4200499121 on OpenAlexafffund
Dawn A. Kellett

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicHigh-pressure geophysics and materials
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
FundersNatural Resources CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsScalable Vector GraphicsSpan (engineering)ScrollGlaucophaneApatiteGeologyComputer scienceMineralogyEngineeringPaleontologyWorld Wide WebStructural engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Low-temperature multi-thermochronometry, in which the (U-Th) / He and fission track methods are applied to minerals such as zircon and apatite, is a valuable approach for documenting rock cooling histories and relating them to geological processes. Here we explore the behaviors of two of the most commonly applied low-temperature thermochronometers, (U-Th) / He in zircon (ZHe) and apatite (AHe), and directly compare them against the apatite fission track (AFT) thermochronometer for different forward-modeled cooling scenarios. We consider the impacts that common variations in effective spherical radius (ESR) and effective uranium concentration (eU) may have on cooling ages and closure temperatures under a range of different cooling rates. This exercise highlights different scenarios under which typical age relationships between these thermochronometers ( ZHe>AFT>AHe ) are expected to collapse or invert (either partially or fully). We anticipate that these predictions and the associated software we provide will be a useful tool for teaching, planning low-temperature multi-thermochronometry studies, and for continued exploration of the relative behaviors of these thermochronometers in temperature–time space through forward models.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.046
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.046
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0390.033
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1290.130

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHigh-pressure geophysics and materialsFrench-language works237,207