MINERALOGY OF THE SNAP LAKE KIMBERLITE, NORTHWEST TERRITORIES, CANADA, AND COMPOSITIONS OF PHLOGOPITE AS RECORDS OF ITS CRYSTALLIZATION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Cambrian Snap Lake kimberlite, in the Northwest Territories, Canada, is a rare example of an economic, near-horizontal kimberlite dyke deposit with an average vertical thickness of ~2.5 m. The diamond deposit consists of hypabyssal serpentine monticellite kimberlite and contains volumetrically minor hypabyssal kimberlite breccias. The kimberlite is composed of serpentinized olivine set in the groundmass of serpentinized monticellite, serpentine, phlogopite, dolomite, spinel, apatite, rutile and ilmenite. The Snap Lake kimberlite is similar in major-element composition to Group-I kimberlite worldwide, yet has exceptionally low CaO and P 2 O 5 . The low Ca character of the kimberlite is evident in the absence of perovskite, low proportion of carbonate, and the occurrence of dolomite rather than calcite as the dominant groundmass carbonate. Three textural types of phlogopite present in the kimberlite (macrocrystic–microphenocrystic, large poikilitic groundmass phlogopite and small groundmass phlogopite) have distinct patterns of composition and zonation. Detailed studies of the zonation reveal a complex evolution of the phlogopite compositions from an early deep xenocrystal to two stages of groundmass crystallization. Superimposed on this evolution common to all kimberlites worldwide is an additional early stage of groundmass crystallization in which barian phlogopite was precipitated only in one part of the dyke. The crystallization of Ba-rich phlogopite is accompanied by Sr-rich apatite, Mn-rich ilmenite and Fe 3+ -rich rutile, and may be related to a highly localized influx of residual oxidized carbonatitic fluid. The deuteric origin of the fluid explains the Ca-poor character of the Snap Lake kimberlite and the formation of late carbonate-rich veins pervasively cross-cutting the dyke.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".