THE ROLE OF MAGMATIC PROCESSES IN THE FORMATION OF BANDED Li,F-ENRICHED GRANITES FROM THE ORLOVKA TANTALUM DEPOSIT, TRANSBAIKALIA, RUSSIA: MICROTHERMOMETRIC EVIDENCE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quartz- and topaz-hosted melt, fluid, and mineral micro-inclusions have been studied to shed light on the origin of the massive and banded Li,F-enriched granites that host the Orlovka tantalum deposit, in Transbaikalia, Russia. Certain quartz and topaz grains, similar to most of the others in their morphology and structure, contain primary or secondary melt inclusions (or both), suggesting that these rocks are of magmatic origin. Their textural features are assumed to stem from different regimes of cooling of parental melts, as indicated by morphological peculiarities of rock-forming minerals. From thermometric and analytical studies of the melt and fluid inclusions, it follows that the Li,F-enriched granites were formed from melt that was enriched in F (~4 wt%) and H 2 O (~6 wt%), contained CO 2 in addition to H 2 O (mole fractions are ~0.08 and ~0.92, respectively), and had unusually low viscosity (~50 Pa·s at 660°C). The existence of quartz crystals that contain melt inclusions and columbite–tantalite microcrystals in the same growth-zones suggests that the melt became tantalite-saturated during early stages of crystallization at the top of the intrusion and late in the crystallization sequence at lower levels. With regard to results of model calculations, the uppermost position of the most Ta-rich melt in the pluton is considered to be caused by the removal of interstitial residual melt from deeper parts of the magmatic body and emplacement into a previously solidified crystalline carapace rather than by crystal settling.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".