Bibliographic record
Abstract
AssrRAcr trasting geological history in the hinterland portion of the North American Cordillera; the area contains Lawsonite blueschist boulders from the Pinchi Fault elongate fault-bounded blocks, including blueschists Zone, British Columbia, locally contain howieite, stilp- and ultramafic rocks near Fort St. James in central nomelane, and Na-Ca-amphiboles. These minerals have British Columbia (near 54"30'N and 124"W) @ater-appruently crystallized late in the metamorphic history of son 1973. paterson & Harakal 1974). The fault zone the rocks. The howieite, of which this is the first reported ako coniains boulders of glaucophane-lawsonite occurrence in Canada, contains more Mg and Al and less;lr.r;hiri:-il wtrictr the howieite occurs.Mn than is reported in howieite from other blueschist local-ities. It is possible that these minerals crystallized at rela-tively low temperature and pressure, compared to the high- PETROGRAPHY pressure conditions of blueschists. Howieite was identified in three samples of blueschist, The rocks are glaucophane-lawsonite granofelses, with no pronounced foliation. Small in-clusions of garnet and clinopyroxene in lawsonite suggest replacement of an earlier garnet-clinopyroxene assemblage; the minerals in a given thin section may not have equilibrated at the same P and T. The mineral assemblages are: TLR-2: howieite- stilpnomelane- crossite- glaucophane- winchite- clinopyroxene (Jdr2-2eAe16-26Di-r Hdoorz- lawsonite- muscovite- garnet (Ahnst-ss SpslaPrp,l-1eGrs2o-31)- titanite- quartz- Ba-Al-silicate (not yet identified); TLR-4: howieite- stilp-nomelane- crossite- glaucophane (magnesioriebeck-ite cores)- clinoplroxene (Jd2r-36Aes-13Di + Hd60 63)- lawsonite- garnet (Almr6-rtSpsl-2Prpa-eGrs2a-33)-
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.586 | 0.315 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".