MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389267958 · doi:10.1007/s00531-023-02368-5

Jurassic to early Cretaceous geodynamic evolution of the eastern Hellenides

2023· article· en· W4389267958 on OpenAlexaff
Ε. Μπόσκος, A. Krohe, Craig R. Walton, Ioannis Baziotis

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Earth Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
FundersAgricultural University of AthensHellenic Academic Libraries Link
KeywordsGeologyCretaceousSubductionPaleontologyBasementFaciesContinental crustVolcanoSedimentary rockStructural geologyContinental marginCrustTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Remarkably well-preserved crustal sections from the Eastern Hellenides offer the chance to evaluate the regional geodynamic evolution of continental crust. Here, we identify and geodynamically interpret eclogite facies metamorphism in the Triassic–Jurassic volcano-sedimentary series of the West Circum Rhodope zone in the eastern Hellenides. Equilibrium phase diagrams and measured mineral compositions were used to inform reconstructions of geodynamic evolution during the early Alpine period. We newly define the existence of the Eohellenic HP belt, consisting of pre-Alpine basement, continental volcano-sedimentary formations, and a Jurassic magmatic arc. We suggest that the Eohellenic HP-Belt was subducted in the late Jurassic to early Cretaceous beneath the European plate margin. Detailed geodynamic reconstructions such as ours provide a robust anchor for future computational models of long-term crustal evolution in the Eastern Hellenides. Graphical abstract

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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207