ASSEMBLAGES OF Ag-Bi SULFOSALTS AND CONDITIONS OF THEIR FORMATION: THE TYPE LOCALITY OF SCHAPBACHITE (Ag0.4Pb0.2Bi0.4S) AND NEIGHBORING MINES IN THE SCHWARZWALD ORE DISTRICT, SOUTHERN GERMANY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several examples of hydrothermal vein-type mineralization with matildite, schapbachite, ourayite, eskimoite, berryite, benjaminite, miharaite, and gustavite occur along the Northern Kinzigtal Fault (NKF) in the Schwarzwald ore district, in southwestern Germany. The complex history of naming of the sulfosalts schapbachite and matildite is shortly revisited here. The sequence of mineralization starts with gustavite, ourayite and eskimoite, followed by native bismuth and bismuthinite. These assemblages are overgrown or replaced by a cubic solid-solution of the Ag–Bi–Pb sulfosalt, schapbachite, which later exsolved into galena and matildite. Subsequently, this intergrowth was again overgrown by berryite, benjaminite, chalcopyrite and tennantite. The temperature of formation of the sulfosalt assemblages straddles the conversion of schapbachite (cubic AgBiS 2 ) to matildite (hexagonal AgBiS 2 ). The upper limit based on untwinned acanthite is 179°C, whereas recalculated compositions of schapbachite–galena intergrowths from various localities indicate a formation temperature above 144°C. Calculated fields of stability of matildite show that it is stabilized by higher temperatures or by its solid solution with PbS in favor of an assemblage of Bi- and Ag-sulfide, and by a high sulfur activity, low pH and an f (O 2 ) around the hematite–magnetite buffer in favor of the more common assemblage of native bismuth and native silver.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".