MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1122896016

Using sedimentary pyrite chemistry to inform regional exploration for sediment-hosted gold deposits - a gold fertility case study from the Selwyn Basin Area, Yukon

2015· article· en· W1122896016 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
PJ Sack, DD Gregory, RR Large, L Danyushevsky

Bibliographic record

VenueeCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPyriteSedimentary rockGeologyGeochemistrySedimentSedimentary organic matterSedimentary basinGeomorphology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regional-scale exploration for sediment-hosted gold deposits is hampered by the challenge of evaluating the fertility of ancient sedimentary sequences that host these deposits. Recent developments in laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry allow for the evaluation of the gold fertility of sedimentary sequences using chemistry of early-formed sedimentary pyrite. We present a case study from the Selwyn basin area of Yukon, Canada, where significant sediment-hosted gold exploration has been ongoing for the last five years. Data from sedimentary pyrite in some Neoproterozoic shales are anomalous in Au and As compared to a global data set of unmineralised sedimentary pyrite. If at least some of the gold and associated trace elements in sediment-hosted gold deposits are derived from recrystallisation of early sedimentary pyrite, it follows that strata containing anomalous sedimentary pyrite should be more prospective. Based on this premise, our data clearly show that Yusezyu Formation Neoproterozoic shales in the Selwyn basin area of Yukon are a fertile source rock for sediment-hosted gold deposits, while pyrite from Nadaleen formation shales are strongly anomalous in Hg and Tl, but not Au. We suggest that the area warrants continued exploration for sediment-hosted gold.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.901

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.163 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania)Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207