CHROMIAN SPINEL COMPOSITION AND THE PLATINUM-GROUP MINERALS OF THE PGE-RICH LOMA PEGUERA CHROMITITES, LOMA CARIBE PERIDOTITE, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Loma Peguera chromitites are located in the central part of Loma Caribe peridotite in the Cordillera Central of Dominican Republic. The chromitite bodies are hosted in typical mantle peridotites, have small size (less than a few meters across) and show massive textures. Primary chromite composition is Cr-rich (0.74 < Cr# < 0.78) and exhibits systematically high Ti (average value: 0.84 wt% TiO2) and Fe3+ (average value: 7.82 wt% Fe2O3). The total PGE concentrations vary from 1.82 to 2.04 ppm, and show an enrichment in Os + Ir + Ru relative to Rh + Pd + Pt. Among the latter group, a positive anomaly of Pt (249–269 ppb) is present as a result of the appearance of Pt-bearing alloys. The PGM assemblage comprises Ru, Os, Ir and Pt-rich phases, including laurite, irarsite, unknown Ru3As2, Ru–Os–Ir–Fe oxides, unknown Pt–Ir–Ni–Fe and Ru–Os–Ir–Pt–Fe–Ni alloys, native Ru and Ru-rich Ni–Fe alloy. The Loma Peguera chromitites are rather unusual in chemical composition compared with those commonly occurring in the Moho transition zone or from mantle harzburgites in ophiolites, but bear some similarity to chromitites from Uralian–Alaska-type complex. The Al2O3 and TiO2 contents of the calculated composition of the melt in equilibrium with the Loma Peguera chromitites are similar to those from island-arc magmas and to some oceanic plateau basalts.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".