The Duck Pond and Boundary Cu–Zn deposits, Newfoundland: new insights into the ages of host rocks and the timing of VHMS mineralization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Duck Pond Cu–Zn–Pb–Ag–Au deposit in Newfoundland is hosted by volcanic rocks of the Cambrian Tally Pond group in the Victoria Lake supergroup. In conjunction with the nearby Boundary deposit, it contains 4.1 million tonnes of ore at 3.3% Cu, 5.7% Zn, 0.9% Pb, 59 g/t Ag, and 0.9 g/t Au. The deposits are hosted by altered felsic flows, tuffs, and volcaniclastic sedimentary rocks, and the sulphide ores formed in part by pervasive replacement of unconsolidated host rocks. U–Pb geochronological studies confirm a long-suspected correlation between the Duck Pond and Boundary deposits, which appear to be structurally displaced portions of a much larger mineralizing system developed at 509 ± 3 Ma. Altered aphyric flows in the immediate footwall of the Duck Pond deposit contained no zircon for dating, but footwall stringer-style and disseminated mineralization affects rocks as old as 514 ± 3 Ma at greater depths below the ore sequence. Unaltered mafic to felsic volcanic rocks that occur structurally above the orebodies were dated at 514 ± 2 Ma, and hypabyssal intrusive rocks that cut these were dated at 512 ± 2 Ma. Some felsic samples contain inherited (xenocrystic) zircons with ages of ca. 563 Ma. In conjunction with Sm–Nd isotopic data, these results suggest that the Tally Pond group was developed upon older continental or thickened arc crust, rather than in the ensimatic (oceanic) setting suggested by previous studies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".