Stratigraphy and geochemistry of the igneous rocks in the Elu Link between Hope Bay and Elu greenstone belts, northeast Slave craton: tectonic setting and implications for gold mineralization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Geological investigation of the rocks in the Elu Link has provided new information on the geodynamic origin of the Neoarchean (ca. 2716–2663 Ma) Hope Bay and Elu granite–greenstone belts. Stratigraphic and geochemical features of these rocks and those of the nearby Flake Lake area in the Hope Bay belt suggest that the two greenstone belts are contiguous, having similar mafic-dominated bimodal rocks comprising abundant basalts to andesites and less common dacites and rhyolites hosting gabbroic and trondhjemite–tonalite–granodiorite (TTG) intrusions. The corresponding parental magmas, whose evolution likely occurred via fractional crystallization and juvenile crustal contamination, formed from both deep and shallow mantle sources. The basalts, andesites, gabbros, and felsic volcanic rocks are variably tholeiitic to calc-alkaline. Chondrite- and primitive mantle-normalized profiles demonstrate (1) flat to slightly fractionated heavy rare-earth element (HREE) patterns with a weak negative Eu anomaly and (2) light rare-earth element (LREE) enriched and strongly fractionated HREE patterns with variable negative to positive Eu anomalies. In contrast, TTG rocks are calc-alkaline, with strong LREE enrichment, HREE depletion, and variable positive Eu anomalies. Altogether, the rocks exhibit Nb and Ti troughs, and variable Nb/Ta, La/Ta, and Zr/Hf ratios indicative of crustal contamination. Chalcophile elements and related ore deposits in the area are inferred to be formed from hydrothermal fluids mobilized during emplacement and after crystallization of their host rocks. An extensional, high-heat-flow back-arc tectonic environment is proposed to explain the stratigraphic and geochemical characteristics and the presence of large gold resources in these greenstone belts.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".