MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2557883621

Constraining the Formation and Alteration of Sudbury Breccia, Ontario, Canada: Implications for Footwall Cu-Ni-PGE Exploration

2016· article· en· W2557883621 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jonathan O’Callaghan

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrecciaGeologyGeochemistryAbsolute datingMining engineeringPaleontologyQuaternary
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sudbury breccia is an impactite situated in the footwall of the 1.85 Ga Sudbury impact structure, situated in Ontario. Developing exploration vectors towards Sudbury breccia-hosted Cu-Ni-PGE mineralization is inhibited by an insufficient understanding of the relative contributions of footwall lithologies versus impact melt. By combining whole-rock geochemistry, field observations, statistical modelling and petrography, this study has determined that Sudbury breccia is a parautochthonous shock melt, which does not require a melt sheet contribution. Furthermore, the trace metal content of the breccia is largely controlled by the assimilation of mafic footwall lithologies, the exception being breccia proximal to mineralization, where a hydrothermally remobilized component is identified. Mineral chemistries demonstrate that some metal remobilization in breccia from both the North and South Range is associated with shear zones and hydrothermal-metamorphic activity. Biotites, amphiboles, chlorites and titanites have geochemical signatures consistent with increased pressure and/or temperatures conditions towards deformation structures hosting sulfide ores.

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)0.001
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)→Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping→French-language works237,207→