The source of ore-forming fluid in Jiajika pegmatite type lithium polymetallic deposit, Sichuan Province
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Jiajika pegmatite type lithium deposit in Kangdi of Sichuan Province is the largest lithium deposit in China. Nevertheless, researches are very insufficient on the source of its ore-forming fluid. More than 400 primary inclusions in the Jiajika deposit were analyzed by the authors. The results show that the homogenization temperatures of CO_2-NaCl-H_2O inclusions and brine inclusions change gradually into each other. When the homogenization temperatures are lower than 300℃, the salinity of CO_2-NaCl-H_2O fluid is lower than that of NaCl-H_2O fluid. The capturing pressure of CO_2-NaCl-H_2O fluid is larger than that of NaCl-H_2O fluid. These data show that the ore-forming fluid evolved from CO_2-NaCl-H_2O to NaCl-H_2O with the falling temperature and pressure, which is similar to the fluid evolution of the Keketuohai pegmatite deposit in Altay and the Tanco deposit in Canada. The laser Raman test shows that the main compositions of CO_2-NaCl-H_2O fluid inclusions are CO_2 and H_2O,with no hydrocarbon detected, which is consistent with characteristics of the fluid derived from the mantle and related to magmatism. The composition of O and H isotopes is located in the area of magma water in diagram, and the δ 13C_ V-PDB‰ values are -3.4‰～-7.3‰. The formation time of pegmatite dikes is lat-er than that of the granite body. These characteristics indicate that the ore-forming fluid resulted from fractional crystallization of magma, with the participation of some connate water at the late stage.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".