The Fort à la Corne Kimberlites, Saskatchewan, Canada: Geology, Emplacement and Economics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Cretaceous Fort à la Corne kimberlite province includes at least seventy well preserved bodies ranging up to 200 hectares in size Kimberlite volcanism spanned at least 20 Ma The main bodies formed by a two stage process (i) excavation of shallow craters into Cretaceous sediments, and (ii) crater infilling by subaerial magmatic pyroclastic processes, both during regressions of the Western Intenor Seaway Each of the twenty five bodies investigated is different but dominated by a few volumetrically significant phases of kimberlite Subsequent eruptions formed nested craters within earlier indurated kimberlites Eruption styles varied from Hawaiian and Strombolian to a probable kimberlite-specific type of eruption which formed unique mega-graded beds Separation of olivine grains from the low viscosity melts was a widespread process that resulted in discrete olivine grams forming approximately half of the pyroclasts across the province Ash-sized clasts are not common indicating removal by a large scale sorting process No diatremes, root zones, dykes, hypabyssal or tuffisitic kimberlite or significant amounts of resedimented material were found The contrast in geology of the Fort à la Come bodies supports, rather than negates, the ‘classic’ kimberlite pipe model The Fort à la Come mode of emplacement comprises a second style of eruption or model which is applicable to kimberlites The new models have been an important foundation of the ongoing economic evaluation of the Fort à la Come bodies Applying predictive geology based on knowledge obtained from other kimberlite bodies would have been misleading
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".