Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accretionary orogens, such as the Appalachian orogen, form by episodic docking of oceanic and continental fragments. Two factors that exert significant control on the development of an accretionary orogen are: (1) the nature and source of the accreting fragments, and (2) the thermal and deformational structure of the crust. This study addresses aspects of both of these controls. In the Northern Appalachians, a long-lived but untested hypothesis suggested that Early Paleozoic accretion in western Maine, which marked the initiation of Appalachian development, involved the docking of an island arc. My goal was to test this hypothesis for the Maine-Qukbec segment of the orogen, where the Boundary Mountains terrane had been identified as a possible collider. Combining the techniques of mapping, structural analysis, petrography, U-Pb zircon and monazite geochronology, geochemistry, and geochemical modeling, I present the following interpretations related to the geologic history of the region. (1) the Chain Lakes massif, which cores the Boundary Mountains, was an Ordovician arc-marginal basin receiving sediments eroded from a Laurentiansource. (2) Anatexis of the Chain Lakes massif disrupted the original sedimentary-volcanic sequence. (3) The Boil Mountain Complex and Jim Pond Formation, which lie
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.001 |
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".