Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Diamonds have been discovered in a variety of potassic ultramafic rocks including group-I and group-II kimberlites, olivine lamproites and aillikites, all of which are macroscopically similar and can be difficult to differentiate when viewed under the microscope. However, group-I kimberlites, and to a much lesser extent group-II kimberlites and olivine lamproites, are known to contain economic concentrations of diamonds. This study addresses the problem of distinguishing among different types of kimberlitic and related rocks by developing a geochemically-based method for classifying them. Geochemical methods have been largely ignored in the classification of kimberlites and related rock types due to high concentrations of xenoliths. However, this problem can be largely overcome by only selecting matrix material for analysis. An evolving kimberlitic magma will become enriched or improvished in Si due to the fractionation of olivine and phlogopite, depending on the initial Si concentration of the magma. As they have low Si concentrations, group-I kimberlites and aillikites can be separated from group-II kimberlites and meimechites, which have higher Si concentrations for any Mg content. Furthermore, since aillikites and meimechites are relatively rich in Fe compared to group-I and group-II kimberlites, these rock types form four separate fields on a Si vs. Fe discrimination diagram. Similar rock-type separation is observed when the ratio of La to Yb is plotted against the ratio of Sm to Yb. Kimberlite and other potassic ultramafic rocks were sampled from nine areas in Quebec: the Otish Mountains, Wemindji, Torngat Mountains, Desmaraisville, Temiscamingue, Ile Bizard, Lac Leclair, Baie James and Ayer's Cliff regions. Major and selected trace element concentrations were determined by XRF analysis for all samples, while a subset of representative samples was selected for trace element analysis by ICP-MS. Electron microprobe analyses of unaltered olivine and phlogopite were also conducted. Of the 37 samples that were classified both mineralogically and chemically, 23 or 62% were correctly classified using Fe and Si. This number increases to 84%, if the REE are used in conjunction with Si and Fe. The Si vs. Fe discrimination diagram separates group-I kimberlite from most aillikite and meimechite rocks and group-II kimberlite/olivine lamproite rocks from most aillikite and meimechite rocks. Therefore, major and trace element geochemistry offers an important tool for the classification of kimberlitic rocks. Vasilenko et al. (2002) and Francis (2003) both suggested that diamond grades can be correlated with the major element compositions of the kimberlites. The data collected in this study confirm the inverse relationship between TiO2 concentration and diamond grade. The lowest TiO 2 values were obtained on samples from the Otish Mountains and Renard samples in particular. Other areas of Quebec are characterized by higher TiO2 contents with most samples containing greater than 2 wt% TiO 2. Therefore, the kimberlitic rocks from the Renard locality have the greatest potential for an economic diamond deposit. The origin of this correlation needs to be explored, however, because it is unclear whether this is a feature of the mantle source, or reflects the survivability of diamonds within the kimberlites.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».