Upper Crustal Collapse Reconstructed the Topography and Remodeled the Fault System of the Chuandian Fragment in the Southeastern Edge of the Tibetan Plateau, Evidenced by Anisotropy of Magnetic Susceptibility Data Sets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The steps of the southeastward stepwise‐descending topography of the Chuandian Fragment (CDF) in the southeastern edge of the Tibetan Plateau coincide with N‐S and NE‐SW trending faults that changed from thrusting to normal activity, indicating that since the Middle‐Late Miocene the CDF maintained an E‐W oriented extensional tectonic environment. However, the anisotropy of magnetic susceptibility (AMS) data sets presented herein, from the Cretaceous and Cenozoic sedimentary strata of the southeastern Tibetan Plateau and its edge, show that since ∼28.0 Ma the CDF remained within a stabilized compressional stress field, oriented NEE‐SWW. A comprehensive analysis of the AMS results, topography, fault systems, and geophysical observations indicate that the northward‐advancing eastern Himalaya syntaxis impeded the southeastward‐flowing viscous lower crust and correspondingly decreased its flux, which could have reduced the thickness of the lower crustal channel beneath the CDF. The original low‐gradient topography of the CDF formed by the viscous lower crustal flow could no longer be supported by the thinned lower crustal channel, and thus gravity drove the collapse of the uplifted CDF. This process reconstructed the topography and remodeled the preexisting fault systems of the CDF, resulting in the coexistence of the E‐W oriented extensional tectonic environment and the stabilized NEE‐SWW oriented compressional stress field of the western part of the CDF, since the Middle‐Late Miocene. Thus, the change in the status of the lower crustal channel related to block interactions provided a major geodynamic setting for shaping the topography of the southeastern edge of the Tibetan Plateau.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".