MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4353046678 · doi:10.1111/ggr.12492

Duluth Complex <scp>FC1</scp> Apatite and Zircon: Reference Materials for (<scp>U‐Th</scp>)/He Dating?

2023· article· en· W4353046678 on OpenAlexafffund
Birk Härtel, W. A. Matthews, Eva Enkelmann

Bibliographic record

VenueGeostandards and Geoanalytical Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsZirconApatiteGeologyGeochemistryMineralogyFission track datingIsochron

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The accuracy and validation of geo‐ and thermochronological dating hinges on the availability of well‐characterised age reference materials. The Mesoproterozoic gabbroic anorthosite FC1 from the Duluth Complex, Minnesota is a reference material for zircon U‐Pb and a suggested reference material for apatite fission‐track dating. We evaluate FC1 as (U‐Th)/He reference material, and determine its apatite U‐Pb, and zircon and apatite (U‐Th)/He age. Our dating results constrain the thermal history of FC1, showing that fast cooling occurred between ~ 1099 and 1040 Ma from ≥ 600 °C to ~ 200 °C. The zircon (U‐Th)/He data from air‐abraded grains give a robust isochron age of 1037 ± 25 Ma (2 s ) without overdispersion. The within‐grain homogeneity of U and Th, the availability of FC1 zircon, and the absence of radiation‐damage effects on the (U‐Th)/He age support its use as reference material. Unabraded zircon grains give lower and more dispersed ages, highlighting the usefulness of air abrasion to control for α‐ejection in (U‐Th)/He dating. Our apatite (U‐Th‐Sm)/He single‐grain ages vary between 180 and 300 Ma. Their wide dispersion argues against the use of FC1 apatite as (U‐Th‐Sm)/He reference material and makes the interpretation of their low‐temperature thermal history complicated.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.239 · 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.

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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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