MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2549957531 · doi:10.1111/rge.12111

The Nucleus Deposit: Superposed Au–Ag–Bi–Cu Mineralization Systems at Freegold Mountain, Yukon, Canada

2016· article· en· W2549957531 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueResource Geology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeologyMineralization (soil science)GeochemistrySkarnBrecciaActinoliteMineralogyArsenopyriteSericiteSphaleriteChloriteSulfideStockworkTitaniteParagenesisBiotiteQuartzPyriteFluid inclusionsChalcopyriteMetamorphic rockEpidoteChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper we present titanite U–Pb (both single crystal CA ID‐TIMS and in situ LA ICP‐MS) data, coupled with ore and gangue mineralogy and geochemical (both lithogeochemistry and microanalysis) data from the Nucleus Au–Ag–Bi–Cu deposit, in the Yukon (Canada) portion of the Tintina Au province. Arsenic‐bearing Au–Ag–Bi–Cu mineralization at Nucleus consists of two distinct styles of mineralization including: (i) reduced Au skarn and sulfide replacement; and (ii) a relatively shallow‐emplaced (as supported by textures and temperature of formation), vein‐controlled mineralization occurring mainly as veins and veinlets of various shapes (sheeted, single, stockworks, and crustiform), breccias, and disseminations. Whereas Au, Bi, and Cu mineralization from skarn is associated with hydrous retrograde alteration phases (actinolite, ferro‐actinolite, hastingsite, cannilloite, and hornblende), numerous alteration types are associated with the vein‐controlled style of mineralization and these include: biotite, phyllic, argillic, propylitic, carbonate, and quartz (silicification) alterations. The mineralization–alteration processes took place over a wide temperature range that is bracketed between 340 and 568°C, as indicated by chlorite and arsenopyrite geothermometers. The Au‐rich Nucleus deposit is characterized by anomalously high content of As and Bi (as much as 1 %), and whereas Au moderately correlates with Bi ( r = 0.40) in the skarn mineralization style (where native Au is spatially associated with native Bi and Bi‐bearing sulfides), the two elements correlate poorly ( r = 0.14) in the vein‐controlled type, in which native Bi‐ and Bi‐sulfide‐bearing veins are locally observed. Sphalerite from the vein‐controlled mineralized type is Fe‐rich (9.92–10.54 mol % FeS) indicative of low sulfidation conditions, as well as high temperature, with the latter further supported by arsenopyrite geothermometry (up to 491°C), low Ag content (3–7 wt.%) in Au, and the high gold fineness (926–964). Whereas molybdenite Re–Os ages from quartz‐molybdenite veins range from 75.8 to 76.2 ± 0.3 Ma, titanite from the skarn type mineralization recorded CA ID‐TIMS and LA ICP‐MS U–Pb ages of 182.6 ± 2.4 Ma and 191.0 ± 1.5 Ma, respectively, thus precluding any genetic link between the two spatially associated styles of mineralization from the Nucleus deposit area. The Au–Ag–Bi–Cu Nucleus deposit is therefore regarded as a superposed system in which two mineralization types, without any petrogenetic relationship, overlapped, possibly with remobilization of early‐formed mineralization.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.265
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.158
Teacher spread0.152 · 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