Timing of sulphide saturation and ore formation in the Sudbury Igneous Complex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Sudbury Igneous Complex (SIC) is widely believed to be the result of melt generation due to meteorite impact, and so models of Ni-Cu-PGE sulphide ore formation must be reconciled with this hypothesis. Moreover, the formation of the Ni and Cu sulphide ores is a product of sulphide saturation and segregation of immiscible sulphide melts, and like the ores at Noril’sk, those at Sudbury leave a fingerprint of the process in the comagmatic silicate rocks which are bereft of much of their Ni, Cu and PGE. At Sudbury, the thickest part of metal-depleted norite is located proximal to the largest known deposits, viz. the Creighton, Copper Cliff and Frood-Stobie Deposits. It is believed that the formation of the initial immiscible sulphide took place shortly after melt sheet formation, but well before any significant amount of silicate crystallization; sulphide saturation and segregation from the crustal melt sheet likely occurred under superheated conditions. The geological data provide important constraints on the sequence of events that formed the different orebodies in contact, footwall and offset dyke environments.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".