MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4319659271 · doi:10.1130/b36736.1

Geology of the Liuyuan Complex, NW China: A Permian back-arc basin ophiolite at the southern edge of the Central Asian orogenic belt

2023· article· en· W4319659271 on OpenAlexaff
Gabriel S. Santos, Jean H. Bédard, Cees R. van Staal, Shoufa Lin, Tong Hong, Kai Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueGeological Society of America Bulletin · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyGabbroOphioliteForearcGeochemistryPillow lavaMaficBasaltPetrologyIsland arcSubductionTectonicsVolcanic rockPaleontologyVolcano

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Located in the southern margin of the Central Asian orogenic belt, the stratigraphy and tectonic setting of the mafic 290−280 Ma Liuyuan Complex have been controversial for decades, with workers arguing for a forearc ophiolite or a continental rift setting. Here, we present the results of a detailed field study, where the Liuyuan Complex was subdivided into troctolite, melatroctolite, layered gabbro, varitextured olivine gabbro, hornblende gabbro, plagiogranite, sheeted dike, and mafic tectonite, in addition to previously identified and studied basalt and chert. All contacts between the igneous facies are intrusive, with gabbroic rocks separated from the overlying basalt by a well-developed and laterally continuous sheeted dike complex. Based on their geochemical affinities, two groups of basalt were identified: group I (low-TiO2) and group II (high-TiO2). A modeled liquid line of descent, assuming perfect mineral fractionation, with a liquidus temperature of 1212 °C, pressure of 1 kbar, fO2 at the quartz-fayalite-magnetite (QFM) buffer, and initial melt H2O of 0.5 wt%, provides an excellent fit to group I lavas, with group II basalts interpreted as having formed from a distinct arc source. The stratigraphy, extended trace-element patterns, and tectonic fingerprinting of the lavas suggest the Liuyuan Complex formed as an ophiolite in a fast-spreading back-arc basin, a setting inconsistent with previously proposed tectonic models for the southern Central Asian orogenic belt. We expand on a tectonic model that proposes the Liuyuan Complex formed as a back-arc to the recently identified Ganquan arc. The back-arc basin was then consumed in a north-dipping subduction zone beneath the active margin of composite Siberia. The magmatic center of this arc migrated southward, likely caused by slab roll-back, with the Liuyuan Complex becoming the basement of an arc. Exhumation of the Liuyuan Complex took place by 267 Ma, as constrained by the age of a subaerial dacite that unconformably overlies the basalts of the Liuyuan Complex.

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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeological Society of America BulletinSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207