MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100597237 · doi:10.2113/gscanmin.38.3.585

THE PGE AND BASE-METAL ALLOYS IN THE PODIFORM CHROMITITES OF THE LUOBUSA OPHIOLITE, SOUTHERN TIBET

2000· article· en· W2100597237 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Wangfeng Bai, PT Robinson, Q. Fang, J. Yang, B. Yan, Z. Zhang, X Hu, Mei‐Fu Zhou, JG Malpas

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Mineralogist · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOphioliteGeologyBase metalGeochemistryChromititeBase (topology)MetallurgyPaleontologyMaterials scienceTectonicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PGE and base-metal alloy minerals from podiform chromitites of the Luobusa ophiolite, southern Tibet include Os-Ir, Os-Ir-Ru, Pt-Fe, Ir-Ni-Fe, Fe-Ni-Cr, and Fe-Co with highly variable compositions. Small amounts of diamond, graphite, SiC, an unnamed chromium carbide, iron silicide (Fe-Si), and native Fe, Ni, Cr, Au, Cu and Si also are present. The alloys and native elements were recovered primarily from heavy-mineral separates of the chromitites, but some are included in, or attached to, magnesiochromite grains. They are mostly subhedral to anhedral and range in size from about 0.05 to 0.5 mm. Some grains have euhedral crystal forms and others have round shapes, suggestive of melt droplets. Fe-Ni-bearing, Ru-rich PGE alloys, Fe-Ni and Fe-Co alloys and native Fe and Ni in the Luobusa chromitites are interpreted as secondary minerals formed by alteration of PGE sulfides. The Pt-Fe, Os-Ir, and Ir-Ni-Fe alloys, Fe silicide and perhaps the native Si are considered to be xenocrysts from the mantle, transported to shallow depths by a rising plume and then captured by the melts from which the Luobusa chromitites crystallized.

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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.158 · 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

Citations116
Published2000
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian MineralogistSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207