MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322760587 · doi:10.1111/ggr.12488

<scp>U‐Th‐Pb</scp> and Trace Element Evaluation of Existing Titanite and Apatite <scp>LA‐ICP‐MS</scp> Reference Materials and Determination of <scp><sup>208</sup>Pb</scp>/<scp><sup>232</sup>Th‐<sup>206</sup>Pb</scp>/<scp><sup>238</sup>U</scp> Date Discordance in Archaean Accessory Phases

2023· article· en· W4322760587 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Omar Khalil Droubi, Ann M. Bauer, Chloë Bonamici, William O. Nachlas, Michael J. Tappa, Joshua M. Garber, Jesse Reimink

Bibliographic record

VenueGeostandards and Geoanalytical Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGeological Society of America
KeywordsTitaniteTrace elementIsotope dilutionApatiteElectron microprobeGeologyGeochronologyMineralogyZirconInductively coupled plasma mass spectrometryGeochemistryRadiochemistryChemistryMass spectrometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The last decade has seen a marked increase in U‐Th‐Pb petrochronological studies focused on titanite and apatite. This has motivated the need for detailed, phase‐specific method development and well‐characterised reference materials with a wide variety of ages and chemical compositions. This study presents new U‐Th‐Pb isotope and major‐, minor‐ and trace‐element mass fraction data for ten titanite and five apatite reference materials based on integrated EPMA, LA‐ICP‐MS and isotope‐dilution (ID) multi‐collector (MC)‐ICP‐MS characterisation. Cross‐comparison of EPMA and LA‐ICP‐MS data for the same titanite reference material suite demonstrates that careful selection of EPMA primary reference materials is necessary to minimise inaccuracies. We further identify a significant X‐ray interference when measuring low Ce abundances in Ti‐bearing phases and outline a method for its correction. New ID‐MC‐ICP‐MS and LA‐ICP‐MS data suggest tri‐concordance (defined as concordant ages for the 238 U‐ 206 Pb, 235 U‐ 207 Pb and 232 Th‐ 208 Pb decay systems) of the MKED‐1 titanite reference material and demonstrate the reproducibility of 208 Pb/ 232 Th measurements in some secondary titanite reference materials. Integration of 208 Pb/ 232 Th results with U‐Pb geochronology provides a meaningful tool to help interpret complex U‐Th‐Pb isotopic age spectra. We provide example applications of 208 Pb/ 232 Th LA‐ICP‐MS measurements toward interpreting Archaean titanite ages from the Acasta Gneiss Complex, Northwest Territories, Canada.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.657
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.261 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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 venueGeostandards and Geoanalytical ResearchSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207