A petrological and geochemical study of the volcanic rocks of the Crowsnest Formation, southwestern Alberta, and of the Howell Creek suite, British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alkaline igneous rocks of the Crowsnest Formation in southwestern Alberta and in the Howell Creek area in southeastern British Columbia have been suggested previously to be cogenetic. To test this hypothesis, samples of both suites were characterized petrographically and their major and trace element geochemistry was determined. A subset of the samples was analyzed for whole-rock Sr and Nd isotope geochemistry. The samples of the two suites are latites, trachytes, and phonolites based on the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) total alkalis versus silica (TAS) diagram. Samples from both suites show similar patterns on mantle-normalized trace element diagrams, being enriched relative to mantle values but depleted in the high field-strength elements Nb, Ta, and Ti relative to the large-ion lithophile elements. The chondrite-normalized rare-earth element (REE) patterns for both suites are light REE enriched, with no Eu anomaly and flat heavy REE. The isotope geochemistry of both suites is characterized by low initial 87Sr/86Sr (SrT = 0.704 to 0.706) and low εNdT (–7 to –16). The Howell Creek samples have lower εNdT and higher SrT than do the Crowsnest samples. Based on the intra- and intersuite differences in the isotope geochemistry, we conclude that these samples are not cogenetic, but rather represent samples that have experienced similar evolutionary histories from a heterogeneous source region in the subcontinental lithospheric mantle.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".