MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412046845 · doi:10.1029/2025gc012211

An Oceanic Plateau Induced Subduction Zone Jump From Proto‐ to Paleo‐Tethys in East Kunlun, Northern Tibetan Plateau

2025· article· en· W4412046845 on OpenAlexaff
Rutao Zang, Yunpeng Dong, Dazhi Jiang, Dengfeng He, Shengsi Sun, Bo Hui, Bin Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueGeochemistry Geophysics Geosystems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyPlateau (mathematics)SubductionPaleontologySeismologyTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The relationship between the Proto‐Tethys and Paleo‐Tethys is still debated. Some researchers believe that the Paleo‐Tethys opened after the Proto‐Tethys closed, while others argue that they are the same ocean with two stages of subduction. We present field geology, geochemical, and geochronological data to support the latter interpretation. We identified a typical oceanic plateau remnant in the East Kunlun Orogenic Belt, northern Tibetan Plateau. The remnant preserves voluminous pillow basalts overlain by limestones and breccias. The pillow basalts are characterized by slight enrichment of LILEs and HSFEs, which are similar to those of modern oceanic plateaus and were derived from 15% to 30% melting of a spinel lherzolite mantle source at a high potential temperature (±1,556°C) suggesting a mantle plume origin. The formation age of the oceanic plateau is determined by zircon U‐Pb dating to be 430 ± 3 and 428 ± 3 Ma. We suggest that the oceanic plateau jammed the subduction of the Proto‐Tethys and led the subduction zone to jump to a new location, which has been attributed to the subduction of the Paleo‐Tethys. This finding also explains the absence of magmatic activities in this region from 370 to 290 Ma.

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeochemistry Geophysics GeosystemsSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207