MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413414021 · doi:10.1007/s00410-025-02247-z

Melt reactions and timescales of melting in pelitic rocks—a case study from the Garhwal Himalaya

2025· article· en· W4413414021 on OpenAlexaff
Charlie Oldman, Clare Warren, Nigel Harris, Barbara E. Kunz, C E Spencer, Tom Argles, Nick M.W. Roberts, Samantha J. Hammond, G. Degli‐Alessandrini

Bibliographic record

VenueContributions to Mineralogy and Petrology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityGeological Survey of Canada
FundersBritish Geological SurveyNatural Environment Research CouncilUniversity of Portsmouth
KeywordsGeologyLeucograniteMigmatiteGeochemistryPartial meltingMuscovitePetrographyMonaziteBiotiteKyaniteZirconIsotope geochemistrySillimaniteMetamorphic rockGneissCrustIsotopePaleontologyQuartz

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The nature, location, longevity and pressure-temperature conditions of different crustal melt reactions during orogenesis provide constraints on the structure, mechanical strength and exhumation of orogenic middle crust as well as element mobilisation and crustal differentiation. The Himalayan orogen offers a natural laboratory for studying crustal melting by exposing both migmatites and leucogranites in its structurally highest levels. We combine previous frameworks that link petrography or bulk geochemistry to melt reaction with in-situ trace-element analyses of large-ion lithophile elements in feldspar, mica, and garnet, U-Th-Pb isotopes in monazite and zircon and thermometry calculations in samples from the Badrinath region of the Garhwal Himalaya. Our samples naturally fall into three groups that we interpret as having formed by fluid-present melting of muscovite (Group 1, all migmatites; 650-750 °C), muscovite dehydration melting (Group 2, migmatites, leucosomes and leucogranites; 730-800 °C) and biotite dehydration melting (exemplified by a single leucogranite that contained zoned and inclusion-rich garnet and porpyroblastic K-feldspar). Geochronological data suggest that melting occurred over 20 Ma, with different samples experiencing different reactions and capturing different parts of the record at different times. Despite experiencing the same thermal history, individual outcrops typically only record one melting reaction instead of a progression through fluid-present melting followed by muscovite-dehydration melting. We interpreted this as being due to local compositional variations and availability of fluids. Our results show that petrographic observations and the mineral chemistry record are similar between (source) migmatites and (product) granites, but that fluid-present reactions are only documented in migmatites. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00410-025-02247-z.

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)0.001
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContributions to Mineralogy and PetrologySame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207