MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136410228 · doi:10.3749/canmin.45.6.1329

ALLANITE-(Ce) AS AN INDICATOR OF THE ORIGIN OF GRANITIC ROCKS IN JAPAN: IMPORTANCE OF Sr-Nd ISOTOPIC AND CHEMICAL COMPOSITION

2007· article· en· W2136410228 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. Hoshino, Mitsuyοshi Kimata, Yoji Arakawa, M. Shimizu, N. Nishida, S. Nakai

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Mineralogist · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsAllaniteGranitic rockGeologyGeochemistryChemical compositionPegmatiteMineralogyChemistryMonaziteZircon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The isotopic compositions of Sr and Nd were analyzed for sixteen samples of allanite-(Ce) from Mesozoic–Cenozoic granitic rocks in Japan (11 samples of an Mn-rich type, and five samples of an Mn-poor type). The Mn-rich allanite-(Ce) crystals have an initial 87Sr/86Sr value in the range 0.70811–0.71398 and an initial 143Nd/144Nd value in the range 0.512148–0.512471, whereas for crystals of Mn-poor allanite-(Ce), the analogous intervals are 0.70499–0.70704 and 0.512547–0.512606. There is a negative correlation between 87Sr/86Sr and 143Nd/144Nd values. The trend of these isotopic data for Mn-rich and Mn-poor allanite-(Ce) is parallel to that for ilmenite- and magnetite-series granitic rocks from Japan, respectively. This parallelism suggests that the genesis of these two groups of allanite-(Ce) is related to that of ilmenite-series and magnetite-series granitic rocks. The characteristics of allanite-(Ce) can shed light on the petrogenesis of granitic rocks.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.163

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian MineralogistSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207