Bibliographic record
Abstract
Troctolitic intrusive rocks poor in augite are common in certain Proterozoic anorthosite complexes and related rocks. The Lower Zone of the Kiglapait intrusion, Labrador, consists of ∼1570 km3 troctolite today and possibly ∼2900 km3 before erosion. In this augite-free Lower Zone, plagioclase fractionation is as low as 1·6% An km–1 of cumulate thickness and averages 3% An km–1. When augite crystallizes after 84% of the magma has crystallized, the fractionation becomes as much as 17% An km–1 of cumulate. Why such a difference? It is clear from first principles of phase equilibria that fractionation accelerates with saturation in augite, but not so clear that the difference should be so great. The answer is to be found in the silica-poor nature of troctolitic magma that is critically undersaturated in silica. This low-silica effect reduces the activity of the NaSi albite component relative to the CaAl anorthite component in the plagioclase, thereby favoring the An component of the liquid and crystals and weakening the fractionation process. As the normative augite component in the magma rises from the base of the Lower Zone to the base of the Upper Zone, the activity of silica also rises slightly and its consequent effect on plagioclase composition tends to diminish. Liquid fractionation paths derived from observed crystal paths, when plotted in the system Diopside–Anorthite–Albite, rise across the liquidus fractionation lines toward diopside and reach augite saturation near the 1 atm cotectic. They produce plagioclase compositions 10 mol % higher in An than pure liquidus fractionation lines predict. The key criterion for the troctolitic fractionation of plagioclase composition is the absence of Ca-poor pyroxene from the rocks. Noritic magmas, by contrast, have higher activities of silica and more effective fractionation of plagioclase. A parallel fractionation of olivine is also retarded in the Lower Zone by the accumulation of ferric iron in the liquid until augite and titanomagnetite crystallize in the Upper Zone.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 teacher head, 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".