Absolute timing of sulfide and gold mineralization: A comparison of Re-Os molybdenite and Ar-Ar mica methods from the Tintina Gold Belt, Alaska
Bibliographic record
Abstract
New Re-Os molybdenite dates from two lode gold deposits of the Tintina Gold Belt, Alaska, provide direct timing constraints for sulfide and gold mineralization. At Fort Knox, the Re-Os molybdenite date is identical to the U-Pb zircon age for the host intrusion, supporting an intrusive-related origin for the deposit. However, Ar-40/Ar-39 dates from hydrothermal and igneous mica are considerably younger. At the Pogo deposit, Re-Os molybdenite dates are also much older than Ar-40/Ar-39 dates from hydrothermal mica, but dissimilar to the age of local granites. These age relationships indicate that the Re-Os molybdenite method records the timing of sulfide and gold mineralization, whereas much younger Ar-40/Ar-39 dates are affected by post-ore thermal events, slow cooling, and/or systemic analytical effects. The results of this study complement a growing body of evidence to indicate that the Re-Os chronometer in molybdenite can be an accurate and robust tool for establishing timing relations in ore systems.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".