Coherent kimberlite at Ekati, Northwest Territories, Canada: textural and geochemical variations and implications for emplacement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The term ‘coherent’ is used in a general non-genetic sense to describe kimberlite characterised by a crystalline groundmass and lacking readily discernable evidence of fragmentation. Coherent kimberlite has been encountered in three main geological settings worldwide: sheet intrusions (dykes and sills), root zone intrusions (irregular pipes) and high-level pipe fills (steep-sided pipes). The EKATI property in the Northwest Territories of Canada (Fig. 1) provides a unique opportunity to study coherent kimberlite from a range of emplacement settings. The majority of EKATI kimberlites are small pipe-like bodies filled dominantly by volcaniclastic kimberlite (VK), including mainly resedimented and lesser primary deposits, as described by Nowicki et al. (2004, 2008). Coherent kimberlite (CK) occurs as minor sheet intrusions, classified as hypabyssal kimberlite (HK), and as volumetrically significant high-level pipe fills, termed pipe-fill CK (pfCK). A recent study of the geochemical trends in a variety of volcaniclastic and coherent EKATI kimberlites (Nowicki et al., 2008) provides insight on the formation of these diverse bodies. Variations in bulk composition of selected kimberlites were found to correlate with the emplacement settings and textural character of analysed samples. In this contribution, we confirm, expand and build on this work.
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 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".