MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979178264 · doi:10.1180/minmag.2007.071.2.123

Gold-bearing arsenopyrite and pyrite in refractory ores: analytical refinements and new understanding of gold mineralogy

2007· article· en· W1979178264 on OpenAlexaff
Mostafa Benzaazoua, Philippe Marion, F. Robaut, A.M.F.R. Pinto

Bibliographic record

VenueMineralogical Magazine · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetal Extraction and Bioleaching
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArsenopyritePyriteMineralogyQuartzIonScanning electron microscopeTransmission electron microscopyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)MineralChemistryMaterials scienceMetallurgyNanotechnologyChalcopyriteEnvironmental chemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A multidisciplinary approach has been used to study Au occurrences within pyrite and arsenopyrite in four refractory Au ores from Colombia, France (Le Châtelet and Villeranges) and Portugal (Neves Norte). The Au was characterized by optical and scanning electron microscopy and analysed using electron and ion microprobes to determine Au distribution, with particular attention to spectral interferences in electron and ion microprobes, background measurements in electron probes, and quantitative analysis using external standardization in ion probes. The ionic emission rate is proven to be dependent on the Au status; combined Au has a greater ion emission than metallic Au. Invisible Au occurrences are closely linked to As distribution. Gold bonding in arsenopyrite, examined by transmission electron microscopy, is shown to be dispersed within the FeAsS crystal structure. Typical growth patterns and As-Au diffusion zoning in pyrite and arsenopyrite may account for the very irregular distribution of Au in these minerals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations36
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineralogical MagazineSame topicMetal Extraction and BioleachingFrench-language works237,207