MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399603673 · doi:10.1144/jgs2024-006

The assembly of Pangaea: geodynamic conundrums revisited

2024· article· en· W4399603673 on OpenAlexafffund
J. Brendan Murphy, R. Damian Nance, Ross N. Mitchell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Geological Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAstro and Planetary Science
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsGeologyPaleozoicPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geodynamic models for Pangaea assembly require knowledge of Paleozoic mantle convection patterns. Application of basic geodynamic principles to Neoproterozoic–Paleozoic plate reconstructions yields Pangaea in the incorrect configuration (predicting that it should have formed by consumption of the exterior palaeo-Pacific Ocean instead of the Iapetus, Rheic and Proto-Tethys oceans). We contend that the mantle legacy of Late Neoproterozoic–Cambrian amalgamation of Gondwana must be factored into models for Pangaea amalgamation. Proxy data suggest that the mantle downwelling driving Pan-African collisions and Gondwana assembly evolved into a mantle upwelling as evidenced by the interplay between subduction-related and plume-related tectonics around the periphery of Gondwana. Orthoversion theory, whereby a supercontinent assembles c . 90° away from the centre of the previous supercontinent, suggests that Gondwana amalgamated above an intense downwelling along a meridional subduction girdle that bisected two antipodal sub-equatorial upwellings. Several processes beneath and around Gondwana reduced the intensity of the original downwelling, as evidenced by plume-related activity along its margins, initiation of subduction zone rollback, and the export of terranes from Gondwana that collided with the margin of Laurentia–Baltica. As upwelling beneath it intensified, Gondwana migrated along the girdle until it collided with Laurentia–Baltica, resulting in the final assembly of Pangaea.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Geological SocietySame topicAstro and Planetary ScienceFrench-language works237,207