MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333962071 · doi:10.14288/1.0053070

The contact metasomatic magnetite deposits of southwestern British Columbia

2011· article· en· W2333962071 on OpenAlexaffabout
D. F. Sangster

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetiteMetasomatismGeologyGeochemistryPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ore zones, skarn, host rocks, and associated intrusions of 12 magnetite deposits were studied in both field and laboratory to determine their mineralogical and geochemical characteristics, origin of the iron, and factors controlling emplacement of iron-bearing minerals. This study seeks a better understanding of the origin and mode of occurrence of contact metasomatic magnetite deposits which in turn may provide better guides to their exploration and evaluation. Local folds and faults are important factors in the explacement of magnetite in volcanic rocks and limestone of the Vancouver group. Adjacent stocks are of intermediate composition. Post-ore leucodiorite dykes are common in many orebodies . The author proposes that the process by which skarn is formed be called skarnification i.e. the replacement by, conversion into, or introduction of skarn. The term would include all processes by which skarn may be formed such as contact metamorphism, contact metasomatism, or regional metamorphism. Skarn in the coastal British Columbia region is composed mainly of garnet (andradite-grossularite), pyroxene (diopside-hedenbergite), epidote, and magnetite. Conformity to Gibbs Phase Rule and the non-appearance of incompatible phases is strong evidence that equilibrium was attained during skarnification. Magnetite is the major metallic mineral, but chalcopyrite, pyrite, pyrrhotite, and arsenopyrite are locally abundant. The temperature of intrusion is estimated to be in the range 800-900°C and stability relations of coexisting minerals indicate a temperature of 700- 550°C daring skarnification. The pyrite-pyrrhotite geothermometer applied to eight specimens shows that ore deposition, took place within the temperature range 400-550°C. The composition of arsenopyrite coexisting with pyrite and pyrrbotite in one orebody indicates a confining pressure of 2600± 1,000 bars during ore formation. The immediate source of iron in these deposits is believed to be nearby intrusions. The ultimate source, however, is very probably underlying volcanic rocks which have been assimilated, in part, by an advancing pluton. Iron is considered to have been derived from plutons adjacent to the orebodies and to have been carried to the sites of deposition as aqueous supercritical solutions of iron chloride. Magnetite was precipitated from the ore-forming fluid by an increase in pH brought about by reaction with limestone. Changes in the chemical and physical nature of the ore-forming fluid during ore deposition are discussed in terms of temperature, density, pH, partial pressures of oxygen and sulphur, and composition. Hydrothermal processes operative in formation of the deposits were solvate opposition, metasomatism, and cavity filling

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 score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.213

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207