Ductile to Brittle Progression During Exhumation Controlled the Architecture of the Naukluft Nappe Complex, Namibia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Mountain belt architecture and evolution can be represented by frictional Coulomb wedges, a simplification that works well in the shallow deformation conditions of many foreland fold‐thrust belts. However, thin‐skinned fold‐thrust belts often occur in rocks that can deform ductily at low temperature. We demonstrate the importance of early ductile deformation in establishing the regional structure of a foreland thrust belt. In the Naukluft Nappe Complex (NNC) in central Namibia, the earliest major shear structures are 10 s meters‐thick mylonite zones in greenschist‐facies carbonate rocks. These evolved to brittle faults as in‐sequence thrusting and imbrication resulted in exhumation of the older structures. Embrittlement caused imbrication resulting in more classical thin‐skinned architecture toward the foreland. Cooling stopped further carbonate mylonitization and shifted the deformation into shales and along contacts. Our 40 km2 map shows sequential evolution of each nappe‐bounding structure from ductile to frictional, superimposed on the exhumation of the belt. The final architecture is representative of this evolution, with low angle, long wavelength structures toward the hinterland and steeper imbricate sets of faults and folds toward the foreland. Mylonite zones and other internal deformation were not accounted for in previous shortening estimates. We negate some of the previously proposed evidence for shortening, and estimate 150 km of translation and internal shortening is recorded in the NNC. We demonstrate that even “thin‐skinned” orogenic belts may be strongly influenced in their architecture by ductile deformation, particularly in the early stages of development, and that this deformation must be accounted for in tectonic reconstructions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".