Structural evolution of the Hemlo greenstone belt in the vicinity of the world-class Hemlo gold deposit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A complex history of volcano-sedimentary deposition, polyphase strain, multiple intrusive events, and various stages of porphyroblastesis is indicated for the Hemlo gold deposit area within the Hemlo greenstone belt. Structural elements can be assigned to at least six stages of development (D1D6). D1 generated small-scale folds and low-angle faults (thrusts?) with no planar fabric, except within strain aureoles around the earliest intrusions. D2 was a progressive event resulting from northeast-directed compression, which generated regional, predominantly S-shaped folds (early D2); penetrative planar and linear fabrics, overturned stratigraphy, and formation of an inflection in the strike of the greenstone belt (mid-D2); and development of high-strain zones with dominant sinistral and local dextral shear sense (late D2). D3 was a distinctly separate progressive event resulting from northwest-directed transpression, which generated variably penetrative east- to northeast-striking foliation (S3), ductile dextral shear fabrics, and small-scale Z-shaped folds (early D3), followed by brittleductile to brittle development of cataclasite and pseudotachylite in layer-parallel zones (late D3). D4 resulted in contractional kinks and brittle fractures, locally in conjugate sets. D5 and D6 are represented by brittle to brittleductile faults, which overprint Paleoproterozoic and Mesoproterozoic dikes, respectively. Four granitoid magmatic events span the interval 27202677 Ma, with emplacement mainly during D2, between ca. 2690 and ca. 2684 Ma. A protracted period of regional medium-grade metamorphism likely spanned the D2D3 stages. The Hemlo gold deposit was emplaced during mid-D2 and was largely controlled by D2 structural elements and competency contrast between rock units.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".