A TEXTURAL AND GEOCHEMICAL GUIDE TO THE IDENTIFICATION OF HYDROTHERMAL MONAZITE: CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF SAMPLES FOR DATING EPIGENETIC HYDROTHERMAL ORE DEPOSITS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydrothermal monazite is one of the most reliable geochronometers for U-Pb dating of epigenetic or hydrothermal ore deposits because its blocking temperature, at ca.700°C, is higher than that of most metamorphic conditions. Although igneous monazite is routinely used for age dating igneous rocks, only a few ore deposits have been dated by hydrothermal monazite. This is due to the similar morphology of hydrothermal and igneous monazite, which prevents the reliable distinction of hydrothermal monazite, in particular. We demonstrate that hydrothermal monazite can be distinguished from igneous monazite by its unique geochemical signature, its local abundance, and to common association with hydrothermal mineral assemblages. Our data and the data of others reported in the literature suggest that the low ThO 2 content of hydrothermal monazite (0–1 wt %) is distinct from that of igneous monazite (3 to >5 wt %) and may be used to determine their genesis.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.030 |
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".