MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413305033 · doi:10.5194/gchron-7-369-2025

Discordance dating: A new approach for dating alteration events

2025· article· en· W4413305033 on OpenAlexaff
Jesse Reimink, Renan Beckman, Erik Schoonover, Max K. Lloyd, Joshua M. Garber, Joshua H.F.L. Davies, Alexander Cerminaro, Morgann Perrot, Andrew J. Smye

Bibliographic record

VenueGeochronology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersJohn and Willie Leone Family Department of Energy and Mineral Engineering, College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, Pennsylvania State University
KeywordsGeologyOptical datingDating violencePaleontologyMedicineHoloceneMedical emergency

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Zircon is the premier geochronometer used to date igneous and metamorphic processes, constrain sediment provenance models, and monitor key events in Earth history such as the growth of continents and the evolution of the biosphere. Zircon U-Pb systematics can be perturbed by the loss or gain of uranium and/or lead, which can result in disagreement between the apparent radiometric ages of the two U-Pb decay systems – a phenomenon that is commonly termed “discordance”. Discordance in zircon can be difficult to reliably interpret and therefore discordant data are traditionally culled from U-Pb isotopic datasets, particularly detrital zircon datasets. Here we provide a data reduction scheme that extracts reliable age information from discordant zircon U-Pb data found in detrital zircon suites, tracing such processes as fluid flow or contact metamorphism. We provide the template for data reduction and interpretation, a suite of sensitivity tests using synthetic data, and ground-truth this method by analyzing zircons from the well-studied Alta stock metamorphic aureole. Our results show accurate quantification of a ∼ 24 Ma in situ zircon alteration event that affected 1.0–2.0 Ga detrital zircons in the Tintic quartzite. The “discordance dating” method outlined here may be widely applicable to a variety of detrital zircon suites where pervasive fluid alteration or metamorphic recrystallization has occurred, even in the absence of concordant U-Pb data.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeochronologySame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207