MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200533939 · doi:10.1130/g49591.1

Crustal thickness of the Grenville orogen: A Mesoproterozoic Tibet?

2021· article· en· W4200533939 on OpenAlexaffabout
Adam Brudner, Hehe Jiang, Xu Chu, Ming Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueGeology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRodiniaGeologySupercontinentLaurentiaGeochemistryCrustFelsicAsthenosphereLithosphereTectonicsCratonEarth sciencePaleontologyMafic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Grenville Province on the eastern margin of Laurentia is a remnant of a Mesoproterozoic orogenic plateau that comprised the core of the ancient supercontinent Rodinia. As a protracted Himalayan-style orogen, its orogenic history is vital to understanding Mesoproterozoic tectonics and paleoenvironmental evolution. In this study, we compared two geochemical proxies for crustal thickness: whole-rock [La/Yb]N ratios of intermediate-to-felsic rocks and europium anomalies (Eu/Eu*) in detrital zircons. We compiled whole-rock geochemical data from 124 plutons in the Laurentian Grenville Province and collected trace-element and geochronological data from detrital zircons from the Ottawa and St. Lawrence River (Canada) watersheds. Both proxies showed several episodes of crustal thickening and thinning during Grenvillian orogenesis. The thickest crust developed in the Ottawan phase (~60 km at ca. 1080 Ma and ca. 1045 Ma), when the collision culminated, but it was still up to 20 km thinner than modern Tibet. We speculate that a hot crust and several episodes of crustal thinning prevented the Grenville hinterland from forming a high Tibet-like plateau, possibly due to enhanced asthenosphere-lithosphere interactions in response to a warm mantle beneath a long-lived supercontinent, Nuna-Rodinia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations48
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeologySame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207