MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2151421046 · doi:10.1139/e10-077

Tungsten in Archean banded iron formation of the former Sherman and Adams mines, Ontario: possible mineralization processes

2010· article· en· W2151421046 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Robert J. Bowins, J. H. Crocket

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Sudbury
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTungstenArcheanGeologyGeochemistryMineralization (soil science)Metamorphic rockMetamorphismHydrothermal circulationBanded iron formationWolframiteSilicateChemistryPaleontologyMetallurgyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anomalous tungsten occurs in Archean banded iron formation from the previous Sherman and Adams mines, Ontario. In Sherman samples from three open pits and one drill core site, with one exception, anomalous tungsten occurred only in the Sherman North pit. Adams mine samples from three pits carried anomalous tungsten in samples of chlorite-rich silicate facies. Statistical evaluation showed that ≥10 ppm tungsten was anomalous with respect to the entire data set. The implications of restricted tungsten distribution, as seen in Sherman occurrences, were evaluated with respect to tungsten mineralization processes. Scenarios considered involve syngenetic, metamorphic, and magmatic-hydrothermal processes. Thermal constraints provided by iron-bearing silicate assemblages and oxygen isotopes attest to contact metamorphism as a potential mechanism for tungsten redistribution within iron formation. However, tungsten of magmatic-hydrothermal origin emplaced as an epigenetic component is considered the essential mineralization process.

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 score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.228

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences→Same topicGeological and Geochemical Analysis→French-language works237,207→