MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406639216 · doi:10.1139/cjes-2024-0147

Cenozoic faulting in the Upper Hyland River Valley, Southeastern Yukon: A thermochronological perspective

2025· article· en· W4406639216 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Eva Enkelmann, Dawn A. Kellett, David P. Moynihan, Tobias Stephan

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityYukon UniversityGeological Survey of CanadaUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Resources CanadaGovernment of AlbertaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaYukon Foundation
KeywordsCenozoicGeologyPaleontologyPerspective (graphical)GeomorphologyStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Logan fault is one of many dextral faults that strike generally parallel to the northwest trend of the Northern Canadian Cordillera. Though widely documented, the timing and magnitude of displacement on many of these orogen-parallel faults are not well-constrained. Here, we present new low-temperature thermochronology data and thermal history models from the Upper Hyland River Valley area in the Logan Mountains in southeastern Yukon that document accelerated cooling between ca. 60–50 Ma in localized regions adjacent to faults that strike obliquely to and likely connect with the Logan fault. We propose that this phase of localized cooling was driven by the activation of a network of faults in the Upper Hyland River Valley, resulting in ∼4–5.5 km of local exhumation. We suggest that faulting in the Upper Hyland River Valley was synthetic with dextral slip on the Tintina fault, a lithospheric-scale structure thought to have accommodated ∼430 km of dextral strike-slip.

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 score0.491
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207