MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4307860086 · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-34343-0

Barium content of Archaean continental crust reveals the onset of subduction was not global

2022· article· en· W4307860086 on OpenAlexaff
Guangyu Huang, Ross N. Mitchell, Richard M. Palin, Christopher J. Spencer, Jinghui Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSubductionArcheanGeologyDiachronousMagmatismGeochemistryContinental crustGeothermal gradientEarth scienceCrustPlate tectonicsMagmaBasaltEclogitizationTectonicsPetrologyOceanic crustGeophysicsPaleontologyVolcano

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Earth's earliest continental crust is dominated by tonalite-trondhjemite-granodiorite (TTG) suites, making these rocks key to unlocking the global geodynamic regime operating during the Archaean (4.0-2.5 billion years ago [Ga]). The tectonic setting of TTG magmatism is controversial, with hypotheses arguing both for and against subduction. Here we conduct petrological modeling over a range of pressure-temperature conditions relevant to the Archaean geothermal gradient. Using an average enriched Archaean basaltic source composition, we predict Ba concentrations in TTG suites, which is difficult to increase after magma generated in the source. The results indicate only low geothermal gradients corresponding to hot subduction zones produce Ba-rich TTG, thus Ba represents a proxy for the onset of subduction. We then identify statistically significant increases in the Ba contents of TTG suites worldwide as recording the diachronous onset of subduction from regional at 4 Ga to globally complete sometime after 2.7 Ga.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations32
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature Communications→Same topicGeological and Geochemical Analysis→French-language works237,207→