THE GLOBAL AGE DISTRIBUTION OF GRANITIC PEGMATITES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An updated global compilation of 377 new and previously published ages indicates that granitic pegmatites range in age from Mesoarchean to Neogene and have a semi-periodic age distribution. Undivided granitic pegmatites show twelve age maxima: 2913, 2687, 2501, 1853, 1379, 1174, 988, 525, 483, 391, 319, and 72 Ma. These peaks correspond broadly with various proxy records of supercontinent assembly, including the age distributions of granites, detrital zircon grains, and passive margins. Lithium-cesium-tantalum (LCT) pegmatites have a similar age distribution to the undivided granitic pegmatites, with maxima at 2638, 1800, 962, 529, 485, 371, 309, and 274 Ma. Lithium and Ta resources in LCT pegmatites are concentrated in the Archean and Phanerozoic. While there are some Li resources from the Proterozoic, the dominantly bimodal distribution of resources is particularly evident for Ta. This distribution is similar to that of orogenic gold deposits, and has been interpreted to reflect the preservation potential of the orogenic belts where these deposits are formed. Niobium-yttrium-fluorine (NYF) pegmatites show similar age distributions to LCT pegmatites, but with a strong maximum at ca . 1000 Ma.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".