Ore‐Forming Fluid Characteristics of the Dayingezhuang Gold Deposit, Jiaodong Gold Province, China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Dayingezhuang gold deposit is located in the central part of the Zhaoping Fault Zone, which is one of the most important gold‐hosting faults in the Jiaodong gold province of China. Dayingezhuang is a typical large‐scale shear zone‐hosted disseminated gold deposit with superimposed silver mineralization. Fluid inclusion (FI) petrography and microthermometry, and analysis of oxygen and hydrogen isotopes for fluid inclusions were conducted to determine the characteristics of the ore‐forming fluids and the processes of silver mineralization. Microthermometry data of FI indicated that ore‐forming fluids are characterized by low salinity and low density. Homogenization pressures of FI are estimated at 20 × 105–220 × 105 Pa. The change in ore‐forming fluids from K2SO4type to NaCl type indicates the superposition of two hydrothermal mineralizing events. Ore‐forming fluids were dominated by magmatic components in the early mineralization period, and affected by meteoric waters in the late period. Gold may have been transported as Au‐S or Au‐Cl complexes, whereas silver was transported as Ag‐Cl complexes. Early fluid boiling and later fluid mixing are thought to be two of the main factors causing the deposition and superimposing of gold and silver to form the large deposit.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".