MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Diamond potential of metamorphic rocks in the Kokchetav Massif, northern Kazakhstan

2008· article· en· W2000046009 on OpenAlex
Victor Pechnikov, Felix V. Kaminsky

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Mineralogy · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsStornoway Diamond (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMassifMetamorphic rockGeochemistryGeologyDiamondEarth sciencePetrologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are two known diamondiferous bodies in Kazakhstan, the Kumdy-Kol deposit and the Barchi-Kol occurrence. Both are located within the western part of a metamorphic belt that outcrops at the central part of the Kokchetav Massif. The metamorphic belt is interpreted as a mega-melange that comprises structural units underlain by HP and UHP rocks. Diamondiferous varieties of the UHP rocks within the Kumdy-Kol deposit form a narrow (~1 km thick), NE-trending band; they comprise less than one percent of the total UHP rock volume. The economically important diamondiferous zone consists of variegated rocks, from silicate to essentially carbonate varieties with a wide spectrum of mineral assemblages. Garnet-biotite gneiss makes about 80 % of the diamondiferous zone. Certain regularity is discernable in spatial distribution of diamonds: linear diamond-rich zones alternate with barren ones. The diamond grade ranges from several carats per ton (cpt) to several hundreds cpt. Different morphological varieties are present among the diamonds: octahedra, cubes, cube-octahedron combination forms, skeletal and spheroid crystals. A wide range of δ 13 C (−8.9‰ through −27 ‰) and δ 15 N (+5.3 ‰ through +25 ‰) values have been measured. Diamonds from different rock types differ in their carbon isotopic pattern: diamonds from gneiss have ‘lighter’ isotopic compositions relative to those of pyroxene-carbonate and garnet-pyroxene rocks. Graphite, coesite, clinopyroxene, rutile, titanite, kyanite, K-feldspar, biotite, phengite, quartz, phlogopite, albite, apatite, chlorite and carbonates are minerals forming intergrowths with diamonds. The most frequent combination is graphite +diamond. We conclude that the model of crustal fluid-metasomatic formation of diamonds in metamorphic rocks reflects the observed regularities best. The morphology of diamondiferous bodies favors the notion of their formation from a carbon-bearing fluid. The micrometer size of the diamonds, along with isotopic signatures, hint at their formation under metastable crustal conditions. This model presumes that the formative process occurred at relatively low temperature and pressure within an open disequilibrium catalytic system. It does not exclude an UHP episode in the geological history of the metamorphic rocks.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.159 · 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