Ultra-high pressure minerals in the Luobusa Ophiolite, Tibet, and their tectonic implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Numerous ultra-high-pressure minerals have been recovered from podiform chromities in the Luobusa ophiolite, Tibet. Recovered minerals include diamond, moissanite, Fe-silicides, wüstite, Ni-Fe-Cr-C alloys, PGE alloys and octahedral Mg-Fe silicates. These are accompanied by a variety of native elements, including Si, Fe, Ni, Cr and graphite. All of the minerals were hand-picked from heavy-mineral separates of the chromitites and care was taken to prevent natural or anthropogenic contamination of the samples. Many of the minerals and alloys are either enclosed in, or attached to, chromite grains, leaving no doubt as to their provenance. The ophiolite formed originally at a mid-ocean ridge (MOR) spreading centre at 177±33 Ma, and was later modified by suprasubduction zone magmatism at about 126 Ma. The chromitites were formed in the suprasubduction zone environment from boninitic melts reacting with the host peridotites. The UHP minerals are believed to have been transported from the lower mantle by a plume and incorporated in the ophiolite during seafloor spreading at 176 Ma. Blocks of the mantle containing the UHP minerals were presumably picked up by the later boninitic melts, transported to shallow depth and incorporated in the chromitites during crystallization.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".