Coeval development of dome-and-keel and linear accretionary architectures in the eastern Wabigoon superterrane, Canada: geology and geochronology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The eastern Wabigoon superterrane in the Superior Province, Canada, comprises two belts with contrasting tectonic architectures. The Onaman–Tashota belt has a dome-and-keel architecture and consists of granitoid intrusions surrounded by infolded Mesoarchean to Neoarchean (2975–2719 Ma) metavolcanic rocks and younger Neoarchean (2710–2695 Ma) metasedimentary rocks. It is characterized by D1 fabrics, folds, and deformation zones, which formed parallel to intrusion-volcanic contacts at 2700 to 2683 Ma. The Beardmore–Geraldton belt, located south of the Onaman–Tashota belt, has a linear accretionary architecture and consists of interleaved 2725 Ma metavolcanic rocks and 2700–2694 Ma metasedimentary rocks. Interleaving occurred between 2694 and 2690 Ma during the same D1 event. Orogen-parallel D2 folds, cleavage, and sinistral deformation zones overprint the D1 structures in both belts. They formed between 2683 and 2665 Ma at transitional greenschist to amphibolite facies temperatures > 515 °C in the Onaman–Tashota belt, and greenschist facies temperatures in the Beardmore–Geraldton belt. D3 dextral transpression occurred late and reactivated early D1–D2 deformation zones in both belts. Although the two belts underwent the same sequence of deformation events, the coeval development of dome-and-keel and linear accretionary structures suggests that different factors controlled the development of D1 structures. Higher density contrasts, hotter weaker crust, and possibly lower strain rates in the Onaman–Tashota belt resulted in the formation of uniformly distributed dome-and-keel structures, while lower density contrasts, strong planar anisotropies, and possibly higher strain rates favored the development of linear accretionary structures in the Beardmore–Geraldton belt.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".