MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4323288188 · doi:10.14419/ijag.v10i1.31937

On the occurrence of Bérem dolerites dyke swarms (north east adamawa plateau, Cameroon)

2022· article· en· W4323288188 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Samira Ngougoure Mouansie, Oumarou Faarouk Nkouandou, Alaxendre Alambert Ganwa, Aminatou Fagny Mefire, Atouba Lise Carole, Adama Haman, Appolinaire Dinamou

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Advanced Geosciences · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Universitaire de la Francophonie
KeywordsGeologyBasaltLavaGeochemistryMantle (geology)Flood basaltPetrographyPetrologySeismologyVolcanoTectonicsVolcanism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Petrography and geochemical outline studied carried out on Bérem dolerites have shown that they crosscut the local granitoıds of the basement toward N100-120, EW and N160E directions. Individual dyke may have 5 m to 50 m wide and extend along strike on 200 m to 3 km. Microscopic observations have distinguished the lavas of doleritic textures of ophitic to sub ophitic types. ICP-AES and ICP-MS geochemical analyses of representative samples have distinguished the lavas of basaltic trachyandesite of normative quartz-hypersthene compositions. All lavas belong to the same lavas series of continental tholeiites affinity which have undergone the fluids circulation and crustal contamination processes. Mantle of Bérem dolerites should be E-MORB mantle component which have experienced the relatively high partial melting rate. Bérem dolerites should be considered as imprints of late Pan African relaxation phase which cracks should have been filled by dolerite lavas.

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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.218
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Advanced Geosciences→Same topicGeological and Geochemical Analysis→French-language works237,207→