<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>M. A. Lanphere</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>M. S. Pringle</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>G. B. Dalrymple</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>1988</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;div class=""&gt;&lt;div class="article-section__content en main"&gt;&lt;p&gt;Contrary to published assertions, the two types of correlation diagrams used in the interpretation of&lt;span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;sup&gt;40&lt;/sup&gt;Ar/&lt;sup&gt;39&lt;/sup&gt;Ar incremental-heating data yield the same information provided the correct mathematics are used for estimating correlation coefficients and for the least squares fit. The choice is simply between two illustrative, graphical displays, neither of which is fundamentally superior to the other.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.1029/GL015i006p00589</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>American Geophysical Union</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Correlation diagrams in 40 Ar/39Ar dating: is there a correct choice?</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>