Kimberlite-sourced bentonite, its paleoenvironment and implications for the Late Cretaceous K14 kimberlite cluster, northern AlbertaThis article is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue on the theme<i>Geology of northeastern British Columbia and northwestern Alberta: diamonds, shallow gas, gravel, and glaciers</i>.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kimberlite-sourced bentonite layers have been discovered in Late Cretaceous sedimentary drill cores located within the Buffalo Head Hills kimberlite field, north-central Alberta. Two bentonites are unambiguously differentiated from “common” intermediate to felsic volcanic-derived Alberta bentonite by having similar whole-rock geochemical composition to ultramafic rocks from the Buffalo Head Hills kimberlite field and worldwide crater-facies kimberlite. The results demonstrate that the geochemical analysis of bentonite can provide a quick, cost-effective means of testing for low-volume kimberlite volcanism. The kimberlite-sourced bentonite is associated with a cluster of Buffalo Head Hills kimberlites known as the K14 complex. The K14A kimberlite occurrence has a previously reported206Pb/238U perovskite emplacement age of 86.8 ± 2.1 Ma. This age is compatible with early or mid-Cenomanian (∼99–96 Ma) and mid-Coniacian to Santonian (∼88–84 Ma) palynological results for mudstone underlying and bracketing the K14A and K14B kimberlites, respectively. Conversely, biostratigraphically significant palynomorphs in host rock cores bracketing the K14C kimberlite indicate emplacement during the Cenomanian or Turonian (∼96–92 Ma). U–Pb detrital zircon ages from syndepositional kimberlite-sourced bentonite directly adjacent to the K14C kimberlite contains a high frequency of young (∼99–92 Ma) zircon with a best maximum206Pb/238U depositional age of 91.7 ± 2.9 Ma. Thus, this innovative approach may provide evidence of multiple episodes of kimberlite emplacement within or near the K14 complex.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".