Three modes of isograd formation in the northern Monashee Complex of the Canadian Cordillera
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This contribution re-examines textural relationships in metapelitic schist from five metamorphic zones separated by four isograds along the west flank of the Frenchman Cap dome in the southeastern Canadian Cordillera. There is a muscovite-out isograd formed by muscovite-dehydration melting in the kyanite-field. Two others, including one coinciding with the muscovite-out isograd, mark the appearance of sillimanite, which was produced along with biotite by garnet breakdown in the presence of melt. Two others mark the disappearance of kyanite: one formed during retrogression, the other coinciding with a shear zone (the Monashee décollement). Only the muscovite-out isograd, therefore, corresponds with the classical definition of an intersection of the topography with a prograde, isogradic-surface. This contribution exemplifies the need to use a descriptive definition of isograd as the trace of a surface across which a specific change in metamorphic mineralogy takes place. It is further proposed to specify their origin whenever possible with terms such as prograde-, retrograde- and structural-isograds. This revised terminology for isograds will improve our understanding of metamorphic terrains by helping to localize cryptic shear zones, gain a better understanding of the retrograde path and put firmer constraints on viable tectonic models.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".