Stratigraphy, structure and metamorphism of Archean rocks at Rainy Lake, Ontario / by Knud Howard Poulsen. --
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rocks of the Rainy Lake area have been deformed \nduring three distinctive episodes. Minor structures provide \nthe geometry which characterizes each episode. The youngest \nstructures include regional faults, a crenulation cleavage, \nkink bands and minor F[subscript 3] folds. These D[subscript 3] structures are superimposed on structures of the D[subscript 2] episode. These include dominant F[subscript 2] folds having axes lying in a penetrative cleavage which parallels the axial surfaces of the folds. Some F[subscript 2] \nfolds have a downward structural facing which is evidence that the stratigraphic succession at Rainy Lake is overturned \nat a regional scale. It is proposed that this inversion took \nplace during a D[subscript 1] deformation by the formation of large F[subscript1] fold nappes. Minor D[subscript1] structures are difficult to document. \nThe rocks of the region were metamorphosed simultaneously \nwith much of the deformation. The distribution of \nindex minerals defines the boundaries of the biotite, \nstaurolite-cordierite and sillimanite-muscovite zones. The \nnon-parallel distribution of metamorphic minerals may be \nexplained by the non-parallelism of isotherms and isobars \nduring medium grade metamorphism. \nThese new data support the view that the Coutchiching \nbiotite schists at Rainy Lake are stratigraphically \nyounger than metavolcanic rocks of the Keewatin Group although \nthey presently underlie the Keewatin structurally. This \nobservation resolves a part of the historically important \n?Seine-Coutchiching problem?.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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".