MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280640598 · doi:10.1029/2021gl097394

Mechanism for the Uplift of Gongga Shan in the Southeastern Tibetan Plateau Constrained by 3D Magnetotelluric Data

2022· article· en· W4280640598 on OpenAlexaff
Feng Jiang, Xiaobin Chen, Martyn Unsworth, Juntao Cai, Bing Han, Lifeng Wang, Zeyi Dong, Tengfa Cui, Yan Zhan, Guoze Zhao, Ji Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetotelluricsGeologyCratonMassifPlateau (mathematics)Inversion (geology)CrustGeomorphologyElectrical resistivity and conductivityTectonicsSeismologyPaleontologyGeophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Gongga Shan (GGS) is the highest mountain on the eastern margin of the Tibetan Plateau. However, the mechanism for the uplift of Gongga Shan is still unclear due to a lack of detailed geophysical studies. Inversion of an array of magnetotelluric data at 120 sites produced a 3D resistivity model that revealed that the GGS massif is characterized by a high resistivity upper crust underlain by a westward dipping resistor at middle crustal depths that is interpreted as the underthrust Yangtze Craton (YC). A thin conductive layer is sandwiched between these two zones of high resistivity. This resistivity model is inconsistent with previously published geodynamic models. Based on the new magnetotelluric results, we propose that the uplift of Gongga Shan occurs primarily by underthrusting of the YC. Additional uplift may be due to transpression on a restraining bend of the oblique‐slip Xianshuihe faults.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.714

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.245 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations34
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207