MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213381089 · doi:10.1111/ter.12582

A plate tectonic view from the top of the world

2022· article· en· W4213381089 on OpenAlexafffund
Kyle P. Larson, John M. Cottle, Andrew Kylander‐Clark, David R. Lageson

Bibliographic record

VenueTerra Nova · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeologyMetamorphismGneissTectonicsMigmatiteShear zoneLithospherePaleontologyEclogitePlate tectonicsGeochemistrySeismologyGeomorphologyMetamorphic rockSubduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract New U–Pb calcite geochronological analysis of shear veins in specimens collected from the summit pyramid of Mount Everest demonstrate that upper crustal deformation recorded in those rocks is Himalayan in age and was ongoing at 45.0 ± 5.4 Ma. This deformation precedes movement along the adjacent Qomolangma detachment by ~30 Myrs and coincides with metamorphism in nearby, structurally deeper, sillimanite‐migmatite gneisses and eclogite. The coeval record of deformation and metamorphism across all crustal levels further coincides with detachment of the Indian oceanic lithospheric slab, the inferred “main” collision and final closure of the Tethys ocean in multi‐collisional models of the Himalaya, and Eocene reorganization of tectonic plates in the South Pacific. This new dataset confirms that the summit rocks from Mount Everest preserve not only a complex, multi‐deformational record of Himalayan orogenesis, but also large‐scale changes in plate tectonics.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0250.003

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.184 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTerra NovaSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207