{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01585014409221902, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004322766570605188, 'mean_word_length': 5.400921658986175, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Granites in the tectonic evolution of the Himalaya, Karakoram and southern Tibet

Four major plutonic belts are related to the Meso-Cainozoic orogenic evolution of the Himalaya—Transhimalaya—Karakoram realm: the Transhimalaya belt and its satellite Kohistan arc, the Karakoram batholith, the High Himalaya belt and the North Himalaya belt. A fifth one results from the lower Palaeozoic epirogenic events: the ‘Lesser Himalaya’ belt. The tectonic settings of their production and emplacement are successively reviewed. Among the first four, two result from oceanic subduction along an Andean margin locally branching into an island arc and two result from intracontinental subduction after closure of the oceanic realm. Both Andean belts are made up of very large quantities of highly diversified granitoids produced more or less continuously during 70 Ma at least, whereas the intra­ continental ones are limited to a small volume of very uniform anatectic granite produced during a 10—15 Ma period. The production and emplacement in the Andean belts is partly controlled by the obliquity of the convergence between India and Eurasia. The emplacement of the intracontinental belts is even more dependent on the regional tectonic setting. These contrasting belts are case studies probing the depths and mechanisms of their production and giving adequate models for older geodynamic frames.