MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Formation of diamond in the Earth’s mantle

2009· article· en· W2091676566 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Condensed Matter · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMantle (geology)GeologyGeochemistryMineral redox bufferKimberliteCratonArcheanProterozoicLithosphereIncompatible elementEarth sciencePartial meltingPaleontologyTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The principal sources of natural diamonds are peridotitic (about 2/3 of diamonds) and eclogitic (1/3) domains located at 140-200 km depth in the subcratonic lithospheric mantle. There, diamonds probably form during redox reactions in the presence of melt (likely for eclogitic and lherzolitic diamonds) or under subsolidus conditions in the presence of CHO fluids (likely for harzburgitic diamonds). Co-variations of δ(13)C and the nitrogen content of diamonds suggest that two modes of formation may have been operational in peridotitic sources: (1) reduction of carbonates, that during closed system fractionation drives diamond compositions to higher δ(13)C values and lower nitrogen concentrations and (2) oxidation of methane, that in a closed system leads to a trend of decreasing δ(13)C with decreasing nitrogen. The present day redox state of subcratonic lithospheric mantle is generally too reduced to allow for methane oxidation to be a widespread process. Therefore, reduction of carbonate dissolved in melts and fluids is likely the dominant mode of diamond formation for the Phanerozoic (545 Ma-present) and Proterozoic (2.5 Ga-545 Ma). Model calculations indicate, however, that for predominantly Paleoarchean (3.6-3.2 Ga) to Mesoarchean (3.2-2.8 Ga) harzburgitic diamonds, methane reduction is the principal mode of precipitation. This suggests that the reduced present day character (oxygen fugacity below carbonate stability) of peridotitic diamond sources may be a secondary feature, possibly acquired during reducing Archean (>2.5 Ga) metasomatism. Recycling of biogenic carbonates back into the mantle through subduction only became an important process in the Paleoproterozoic (2.5-1.6 Ga) and diamonds forming during carbonate reduction, therefore, may predominantly be post-Archean in age. For eclogitic diamonds, open system fractionation processes involving separation of a CO(2) fluid appear to dominate, but in principal the same two modes of formation (methane oxidation, carbonate reduction) may have operated. Direct conversion of graphitized subducted organic matter is not considered to be an important process for the formation of eclogitic diamonds. The possible derivation of (12)C enriched carbon in eclogitic diamonds from remobilized former organic matter is, however, feasible in some cases and seems likely involved, for example, in the formation of sublithospheric eclogitic diamonds from the former Jagersfontein Mine (South Africa).

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.

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 score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.186 · 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