A Review of the Spatiotemporal Evolution of the High Arctic Large Igneous Province, and a New U‐Pb Age of a Mafic Sill Complex on Svalbard
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The High Arctic Large Igneous Province (HALIP) formed in the circum‐Arctic during the Cretaceous. The timing and duration of emplacement of these mafic magmas are important for understanding the climatic and environmental effects, yet many uncertainties remain. The dating methods used vary greatly between different regions. For example, the mafic intrusions in Svalbard have mainly been dated using the 40 K/ 40 Ar method, which is more sensitive to overprinting at lower temperatures. This is problematic especially in the Arctic, where the Eocene Eurekan orogeny has impacted the intrusions post‐emplacement. Meanwhile, in the Canadian Arctic, 206 Pb/ 238 U dating on zirconium minerals has been the most common method employed, which requires much higher temperatures to be reset. We present a new compilation of ages for HALIP igneous and volcanic rocks in the circum‐Arctic, derived from a thorough review and reassessment of previously reported data. This compilation applies rigorous, method‐specific criteria to evaluate the reliability of existing HALIP age determinations, ensuring traceability and applicability for future data sets. By establishing a robust framework for assessing age data, this approach enhances the reliability of geological interpretations of HALIP magmatism, and highlights, for example, the spatial migration of peak magmatic activity through time in the High Arctic. To improve our understanding of the temporal evolution of the HALIP, we also present a new 206 Pb/ 238 U baddeleyite isotopic dilution thermal ionization mass spectrometry age from Svalbard. The new weighted mean 206 Pb/ 238 U age from Svalbard, 123.3 ± 1.6 Ma, is based on six samples belonging to one large sill. This age is in perfect agreement with existing published 206 Pb/ 238 U and 40 Ar/ 39 Ar ages, and suggests magma emplacement on Svalbard between 124.7 ± 0.3 and 120.2 ± 1.9 Ma ago.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".