MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040960519 · doi:10.3997/2214-4609.201412336

Regional Groundwater Dynamics as a Cause for the Genesis of the Pine Point MVT Lead-Zinc Ore Deposits

2015· article· en· W2040960519 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
K. U. Weyer, David H. Adams

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDolomiteHydrothermal circulationGeologyGroundwaterContext (archaeology)DevonianGeochemistryMineralization (soil science)Soil scienceGeotechnical engineeringPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genesis of MVT ore deposits, like those at Pine Point mines in Canada, has been the subject of debate for many years. The consensus is that the ore bodies were caused by hydrothermal saline water in the geological past from the Middle Devonian age to the Tertiary age. Garven (1985) pointed out that ‘from a hydrologic perspective, ore genesis could have taken place at any period in which gravity-driven flow systems were operative.’ Presently favorable gravity-driven flow systems are in place. Understanding their groundwater dynamics puts some of the previously established hypotheses on the Pine Point ore genesis into a new context. It is generally said that, based on isotope and fluid inclusion data, the temperature of the ore forming fluid in the Pine Point area must have been hydrothermal in a temperature range approaching 100 °C or more. The average homogenized temperature in fluid inclusions in dolomite in the area is 116 °C and the burial temperature about 70 °C according to Qing (1991). This paper shows, however, that presently mineralization occurs at 3°C water temperature driven by microorganisms.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.740
Threshold uncertainty score0.273

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.208 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedingsSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207