MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The magnetic signature of Neoarchean alkaline intrusions and their related gold deposits: Significance and exploration implications

2016· article· en· W2503040835 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Noémie Fayol, Michel Jébrak, Lyal B. Harris

Bibliographic record

VenuePrecambrian Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsGreenstone beltGeologyMagnetiteGeochemistryArcheanPlutonCratonMineralization (soil science)IntrusionLayered intrusionTectonicsSeismologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exploration for Neoarchean intrusion-related gold deposits in the Abitibi greenstone belt of the Superior Craton, Canada, is of increasing interest as the two most recent Abitibi gold mines are intrusion-related. Late-Archean alkaline intrusions in the Abitibi Subprovince are separated into three groups based on their geophysical and geochemical signatures: (1) large, heterogeneous, unmineralized plutons; (2) small magnetite rich-syenites with magmatic gold, which is often remobilized along fault arrays; (3) small magnetite poor-quartz-syenites to alkali granites with magnetite-rich halos and magmatic gold mineralization. The positive, aeromagnetic high centred signature of some gold-bearing intrusions is related to the high content in magnetite of the more ferromagnesian intrusions resulting from their magmatic evolution. Intrusions with an annular shape record a lower Fe2O3t content in their less magnetite-rich cores and gold mineralization occurs within their magnetite-rich metasomatized host-rocks. If the aeromagnetic signature has an annular-shape, the lower-magnetic zones in the magnetic aureole are the more favourable zones. For those with a positive magnetic signature, the intrusion itself is the target.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePrecambrian ResearchSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207