MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2324407662 · doi:10.3749/canmin.49.6.1505

MINERALOGY OF RARE OCCURRENCES OF PRECIOUS-METAL-ENRICHED MASSIVE SULFIDE IN THE VOISEY'S BAY Ni-Cu-Co OVOID DEPOSIT, LABRADOR, CANADA

2011· article· en· W2324407662 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Michelle Kelvin, Paul Sylvester, Louis J. Cabri

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Mineralogist · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPentlanditePyrrhotiteGalenaChalcopyriteSulfide mineralsGeologyMineralSulfideGeochemistryMineralogyMineral redox bufferSphaleritePyriteCopperMetallurgyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Voisey’s Bay Ovoid Ni–Cu–Co magmatic sulfide deposit, Labrador, is generally poor in precious metals (Pt, Pd, Ag, Au), but unusual occurrences with elevated levels (Pt + Pd > 0.5 ppm) are present. We present a quantitative description of the precious-metal mineralogy of four such occurrences within massive sulfides. The four samples, all from near the center of the Ovoid, were examined by SEM-based Mineral Liberation Analysis for characterization of precious-metal minerals. Distributions of precious metals among the major sulfide minerals were estimated using mass-balance calculations based on bulk assays of the samples and the proportions and compositions of the minerals. The results indicate that the majority of precious metals are present as discrete mineral phases including sperrylite, froodite, michenerite, Au–Ag alloy, volynskite, stutzite and acanthite, whereas minor to moderate amounts of Pt, Pd, Ag and Au are found in solid solution in pyrrhotite, pentlandite, chalcopyrite and galena. The precious-metal minerals are normally associated with pentlandite, galena, chalcopyrite, pyrrhotite and magnetite, and rarely with breithauptite (NiSb), altaite (PbTe), other precious-metal minerals and native bismuth. With the exception of sperrylite, which is coarse grained and liberated easily by electric pulse disaggregation, the precious-metal minerals are most commonly found as fine inclusions in pentlandite and galena, and less so as larger attachments. The associations are consistent with previously reported precious-metal mineral data from a hornblende gabbro dyke of the Southeast Extension Zone at Voisey’s Bay, demonstrating similar modes of crystallization, which are likely related to crystallization of a highly differentiated sulfide magma in both areas. Processing of Pt from sperrylite and perhaps Pd from froodite could be achieved in ores with a mineralogy similar to the samples described here by grinding, and gravity or flotation methods, but the Au–Ag alloy, volynskite and stutzite would likely be too fine to recover as discrete grains for Ag and Au concentration. Instead, the Ag and Au could be recovered as a by-product of Ni–Cu–Co processing of the pentlandite and chalcopyrite, which are the major hosts of the Ag and Au minerals.

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 score0.155
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.192
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

Citations9
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian MineralogistSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207