MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7009945155

Geology of the Nain Complex, Labrador, Canada: Occurrence of the Early Archean Supracrustals

2013· article· en· W7009945155 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTokyo Tech Research Repository (Tokyo Institute of Technology) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverprintingGeosynclineArcheanLiquationPrecambrian
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Hadean is the most mysterious period because no rocks and\ngeologic bodies are preserved except for only the zircons in\nWestern Australia, Canada, China and Greenland [1]. But, it is the\nmost important period because the early evolution possibly clinched\nthe earth’s history. We try to find the earliest supracrustal rocks in\nthe world to investigate the Hadean tectonics. As far, the oldest\nsupracrustal rocks are found in Akilia association in West\nGreenland, Nuvvuagittuq in Quebec, and Nain Complex in Labrador\n[2,3].\nWe made geological survey in the Nain Complex, and\nreinvestigated the occurrence of the supracrustal rocks and their\nrelationship with the ambient orthogneisses. Previous works focused\non distribution of the supracrustal belts within the orthogneisses\n[e.g. 4], but the detailed field occurrence of the supracrustal rocks\nwithin the belts is still ambiguous. Therefore, we focus on their\ninternal structures.\nThe supracrustal belts are repeatedly intruded by granitic\nintrusions with some ages and their original structures are obscured,\nbut their lithostratigraphies are relatively well preserved in Nulliak,\nBig and Shuldham islands and St Jones Harbor. The supracrustal\nbelts in Nulliak and Big islands comprise ultramafic rocks, mafic\nrocks and mafic sediments intercalated with feldspathic sediments\nand banded iron formations in ascending order. In the St Jones\nHarbor, it is composed of ultramafic rocks, mafic rocks, banded iron\nformation, and clastic sediments, intercalated with chert in the\nmiddle and with bedded carbonate rocks in the upper part,\nrespectively, in ascending order. In the Shuldham Island, it consists\nof ultramafic rocks, layered gabbro with precursors of plagioclase\nand pyroxene accumulation layers, mafic rocks and terrigenous\nsediments in ascending order. The lithostratigraphies are very\nsimilar to oceanic plate stratigraphy. The fact that some supracrustal\nbelts are intruded by Uivak I orthogneisses and presence of >3.86\nGa zircons in the supracrustal rocks [e.g. 3] suggest that the\nsupracrustal belts have early Archean ages. In addition, despite of the\nstill ambiguous relationship between Nanok Gneiss and supracrustal\nrocks, presence of Nanok Gneiss (3.85 to 3.91 Ga) in this area [5]\nimplies that the supracrustal belts date back to the earliest Archean.\n[1] Froude et al. (1983) Nature 304, 616-618; Nelson et al.\n(2000) EPSL 181, 89-102; Mojzsis & Harrison (2002) EPSL 202,\n563-576; Iizuka et al. (2006) Geology 34, 245-248; Wang et al.\n(2007) CSB 52, 3002-3010. [2] Bowring & Williams (1999) CMP\n134, 3-16; Nutman et al. (1996) Precamb. Res. 78, 1-39; O'Neil et\nal. (2008) Science 321, 1828-1831. [3] Schiøtte et al. (1989) Can\nJour Earth Sci. 26, 2636-2644. [4] Bridgwater et al. (1974) Geol\nSurv Canada, Paper 75-1 Part A, 282-296. [5] Collerson (1983)\nin Abstracts for Early Crustal Genesis Field Workshop, LPI,

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.396
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.208 · 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