MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Primary and secondary niobium mineral deposits associated with carbonatites

2014· article· en· W2106135749 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueOre Geology Reviews · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaLakehead University
KeywordsCarbonatiteSupergene (geology)GeologyGeochemistryPyrochloreMineralization (soil science)NiobiumPeralkaline rockColumbiteMineralogyMantle (geology)WeatheringChemistryVolcano

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work reviews the character and origin of primary and supergene economic deposits of niobium associated with carbonatites. The Brazilian supergene deposits account for about 92% of the total worldwide production of Nb, with the primary St. Honoré carbonatite and other sources accounting for only for 7 and 1%, respectively. The emphasis of the review is upon the styles of Nb mineralization and the geological factors which lead to economic concentrations of Nb-bearing minerals. Primary economic deposits of Nb are associated principally with carbonatites found in diverse types of plutonic alkaline rock complexes. Primary magmas are principally those of the melilitite, nephelinite and aillikite clans. Although many primary niobium deposits are associated with carbonatites, ijolites and syenites in the same alkaline complexes can also contain significant Nb mineralization in the form of niobian titanite and diverse Nb–Zr-silicates (marianoite-wöhlerite); these potential sources of Nb have not as yet been explored or exploited. Primary Nb deposits can be regarded as large tonnage, low grade (typically < 1 wt.% Nb2O5) disseminated ore deposits. Niobium is hosted principally by diverse Na–Ca–U-pyrochlores, ferrocolumbite and fersmite. Every actual, and potential, primary Nb deposit is unique with respect to the varieties of pyrochlore present; extent of replacement by other minerals; and degree of alteration by deuteric/hydrothermal fluids. Within a given occurrence individual petrographically-defined units of carbonatite contain distinct suites of pyrochlore. Bulk rock analysis for Nb gives no indication of the style of mineralization and provides no information of use regarding beneficiation of the ore. Evaluation of any Nb deposit requires extensive definition drilling and detailed mineralogical studies. Primary Nb deposits result from the early crystallization of Nb-bearing minerals in magma chambers followed by crystal fractionation, magma mixing, and redistribution of Nb-minerals by density currents. Supergene Nb deposits occur in laterites formed by extensive weathering of primary carbonatites. The process results in the decomposition of apatite and magnetite, removal of soluble carbonates and physical concentration of resistant primary pyrochlore. Intense lateritization results initially in the replacement of primary pyrochlores by supergene, commonly Ba, Sr, K or Pb-bearing pyrochlores, and ultimately complete decomposition of pyrochlore and formation of Nb-bearing rutile, brookite, and anatase. The Nb contents of the laterites can be enriched up to 10 times or more above those of the primary carbonatite. Commonly, pyrochlores in laterites are fine grained and intimately intergrown with hematite, goethite and minerals of the crandallite group. The different styles of mineralization of primary and secondary Nb deposits require different methods of ore beneficiation.

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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.180
Teacher spread0.171 · 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