Structural styles and kinematic evolution of the Front Ranges of the Southern Canadian Rockies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We establish a comprehensive three-dimensional geometric and kinematic description of the Front Ranges in the Bow Valley–Kananaskis region of the Southern Canadian Rocky Mountains to rigorously evaluate and expand upon fundamental paradigms that define our understanding of thin-skinned fold- and- thrust belts. We employ a modern strike and dip data collection method based on high-resolution imagery and digital elevation models, verified by direct field observations, to analyze the structures and construct balanced and retrodeformable cross sections. This approach yields >10,000 new attitude measurements of bedding and faults that represent a more than tenfold increase in previously published maps of the region. These observations and our analysis support many of the fundamental conclusions of previous work, namely the imbricate structural style and general break-forward progression of thrusting. However, our analysis suggests a pervasive, multi-modal distribution of bed dips separated by axial surfaces or hinge zones in the backlimbs of thrust sheets as opposed to the previous hypothesis of listric backlimb geometries. Our data also show bedding and fault dips that are generally parallel. These observations, coupled with the geologic map patterns, motivate refinements to the interpretation of structural styles, geometry, and faulting sequence of the region, including the presence of multiple regional basal detachments over an ~950 m zone. Through sequentially restoring our sections, we calculate a total shortening of 67 (±17%) km and derive a kinematic history of the Front Ranges that involves a complex, episodic sequence of thrusting. Overall, these insights, coupled with applying our semi-automated geologic data collection methods have applications for investigating exposed fold- and- thrust belts worldwide.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".