MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2050599985 · doi:10.1139/e11-033

High-temperature brine in chalcopyrite-rich quartz vein 40 km southwest of Sudbury, Ontario

2011· article· en· W2050599985 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Eva S. Schandl, Michael P. Gorton, Colin J. Bray

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeologyGabbroGeochemistryFluid inclusionsQuartzFelsicIgneous rockVeinPyrrhotiteMineralogyMaficPyrite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Lac Panache (Nipissing) gabbro intrudes Huronian metasediments ca. 40 km southwest of the Sudbury Igneous Complex. The gabbro contains disseminated sulfides and is in contact with a chalcopyrite-rich quartz vein that crystallized from highly saline fluids (46.8 ± 3 equivalent wt.% NaCl) at a minimum temperature of 420 ± 27 °C. Chloride and carbonate inclusions in opened fluid inclusion cavities in the vein suggest that the brine contained dissolved metals (in addition to NaCl), such as Fe, Cu, Mn, and Co. The weakly altered quartz vein postdated regional metamorphism and was probably contemporaneous with the 1.7 Ga felsic magmatism and attendant albite alteration in the area. Cl-rich scapolite in the gabbro and highly saline fluid inclusions in the quartz vein suggest the existence of circulating hot brine throughout the tectonic evolution of the region. The 2.2 Ga old gabbro contains an abundance of Cl-rich scapolite intergrown with pyrrhotite and chalcopyrite that formed during the early hydrothermal (deuteric) alteration of the gabbro.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.160 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences→Same topicGeological and Geochemical Analysis→French-language works237,207→