MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037661455 · doi:10.2113/gsecongeo.103.5.1005

Footwall-type Cu-Ni-PGE Mineralization in the Broken Hammer Area, Wisner Township, North Range, Sudbury Structure

2008· article· en· W2037661455 on OpenAlexaffabout
Attila Péntek, Ferenc Molnár, David H. Watkinson, Peter C. Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueEconomic Geology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyMineralization (soil science)GeochemistryMineralogyMining engineeringSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Footwall-type Cu-Ni-PGE (Platinum-group element) deposits are a major focus of recent exploration in the Sudbury mining camp, owing to their higher Cu and precious metal contents compared to orebodies situated along the lower contact of the Sudbury Igneous Complex. The most important footwall-type orebodies occur in the Onaping-Levack area of the North Range, but economic deposits are found along the East Range of the structure as well. Recently, promising occurrences were also discovered in Wisner Township of the North Range. In this paper we report results from two main footwall-type Cu-Ni-PGE occurrences (the Broken Hammer zone and the South zone) of Wisner Township. Both discoveries are situated in intensely brecciated zones of the footwall (Sudbury Breccia), 1,300 and 500 m, respectively, north of the present Sudbury Igneous Complex-footwall contact. The mineralization consists of (1) massive sulfide veins, (2) disseminated/replacement sulfides, and (3) silicate-quartz–dominated veins. Although massive sulfide veins account for the major part of the resource, sulfide-poor disseminations may have similarly high precious metal contents. Ore assemblages are dominated by chalcopyrite, millerite, magnetite, and/or pyrite, quartz, and hydrous silicates. These are accompanied by platinum-group minerals (PGM) and other trace minerals, which commonly occur as composite grains within sulfides and hydrous silicates. These include minerals typical of footwall-type deposits (e.g., merenskyite, michenerite, hessite), but also minerals found only in a few Sudbury deposits (e.g., clausthalite, sopcheite, naumannite, bohdanowiczite). An unnamed CuPdBiS 3 mineral is one of the most abundant PGM at Broken Hammer and might be a Pd-equivalent of muckeite (CuNiBiS 3 ). Statistical investigation of metal distribution patterns using grab sample and drilling data sets from both localities indicate important differences between the two occurrences and the various mineralization styles (e.g., increasing Cu/(Cu+Ni) and decreasing Pt/(Pt+Pd) ratio with increasing sulfide content; metal concentrations recalculated to 100% sulfides decrease by up to two orders of magnitude for all metals from the disseminated to the massive sulfides). Fluid inclusion studies revealed three fluid generations which are very similar to those described from well known footwall-type deposits of the Onaping-Levack area. Primary polyphase fluid inclusions in Cu-Ni-PGE–bearing assemblages represent a highly saline (30–40 wt % NaCl equiv) magmatic-hydrothermal system with a high temperature (min 450°–500°C) and a lower temperature (min 300°–350°C) stage. A later low-temperature Ca-rich fluid (min 100°–200°C) is most probably part of a post-Sudbury Igneous Complex regional fluid flow in which temperature was controlled by the geothermal gradient and not related to ore-forming processes. The fluid inclusion data indicate that mobilization of highly saline and relatively high temperature (400°–500°C) Sudbury Igneous Complex-related magmatic-hydrothermal fluids similar to those described from the Onaping-Levack embayment also occurred in the Wisner footwall. Although our studies do not rule out the possibility of an initial magmatic sulfide melt emplacement, they prove that magmatic-hydrothermal fluids played a significant role in the transport and deposition of metals.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.289
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0260.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEconomic GeologySame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207