MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388412784 · doi:10.24425/ppr.2020.132567

Geophysical properties of the crust and upper mantle of the ocean-continent transition in Svalbard area

2020· article· en· W4388412784 on OpenAlexaff
Grad Marek, Jacek Majorowicz

Bibliographic record

VenuePolish Polar Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyCrustRidgeVolcanoOceanic crustArcticLithosphereTransectArchipelagoOceanographyGeophysicsSeismologyTectonicsPaleontologySubduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a review of geophysical studies of the crust and the lithosphere- asthenosphere boundary (LAB) in the ocean-continent transition in the area of Spitsbergen (Svalbard Archipelago) in high Arctic. Over last decades many investigations were performed during Polish geophysical expeditions, as well as in the framework of international cooperation with scientists from Germany, Japan, Norway and USA. We compiled here existing seismic, gravity and thermal models down to LAB depth along the 800 km long transect extending from the actively spreading Knipovich Ridge, across southern Spitsbergen to the Kong Karls Land Volcanic Province. The results of all methods are very consistent, although they are sensitive to different physical parameters: seismic wave velocities, densities and thermal. The thinnest lithosphere of only 12 km is found beneath the Knipovich Ridge. Only 50 km to the west and 50 km to the east of the ridge the LAB depth increases to about 30 km, and this value corresponds to the oceanic structure of the North Atlantic Ocean. Beneath southern Spitsbergen the LAB depth is about 55 km and increases to 90–100 km beneath continental structure of the Barents Sea. The uplift of the LAB close to distance of 700 km along transect could be correlated with Kong Karls Land Volcanic Province.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.152 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolish Polar ResearchSame topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207