Pegmatites: DAVID LONDON. 368 Pp. The Canadian Mineralogist. Special Publication 10. Mineralogical Association of Canada, Quebec, QC G1K 9A9. ISBN 978-0-921294-47-4. 2008. Price US$125.00, MAC Members US$100.00.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
If asked to name a type of unaltered igneous rock with economic potential, many geologists would respond, “pegmatite.” And, if they didn’t know already, the economic geologists among them would be gratified to learn that a commonly used classification system of pegmatites is a chemical one (LCT for Li-Cs-Ta pegmatites, and NYF for Nb-Y-F pegmatites), and that pegmatites concentrate more elements of the periodic table to mineable grade than any other igneous rock, not to mention their additional considerable gem (tourmaline, beryl, topaz, garnet) and ceramic (feldspar, quartz, muscovite) potential. Economically attractive, certainly, but with their bewilderingly large range of chemical compositions, minerals, textures, and relationships to granites, pegmatites also present an almost intractable petrogenetic challenge. David London has crystallized his considerable knowledge of pegmatites into a single attractive gem of a book. Pegmatites is part coffee table book (with its wealth of high-quality color photographs and effective line drawings), part igneous petrology textbook (with good explanations of all the necessary concepts, and its raising of the pedagogical standard), and part pegmatite polemic (with its strong, but controversial, advancement of the London model for the origin of pegmatites). Pegmatites is an outstanding example …
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.142 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".