Origin and evolution of ore-forming fluids, and genesis of the Duhuangling and Jiusangou gold deposits in eastern Yanbian, northeast China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Duhuangling and Jiusangou gold deposits are located east of the Yanbian area, northeast China. We present the results of systematic studies of the ore geology, fluid inclusion (FI) features, and isotopic geochemistry of the two gold deposits. Four mineralization stages have been defined in each gold deposit: pyrite + sericite + quartz (stage I), quartz + pyrite ± chalcopyrite ± arsenopyrite (stage II), quartz + native gold + polymetallic sulfide (stage III), and quartz–calcite (stage IV). FIs from the two gold deposits are similar and contain five types: pure vapor phase (V-type), vapor-rich phase (RV-type), liquid-rich phase (RL-type), daughter mineral-bearing polyphase (S-type), and pure liquid phase (L-type). Stage I FIs homogenize at temperatures of 350–450 °C, yielding salinities of 5.40–48.67 wt.%. FIs from both stages II and III samples homogenize at 160–350 °C, yielding salinities of 5.71–39.75 wt.%. FIs in pyrite from the stage II have 3He/4He ratios of 0.0069–0.0148 Ra and 40Ar/36Ar ratios of 1302–4433, demonstrating that ore-forming fluids of the two gold deposits were derived from the crust. The δD values of the two gold deposits range from −107‰ to −92‰, with δ18OH2O values from 4.3‰ to 9.0‰, indicating that the ore-forming fluids were mainly magmatic water in origin. Lead isotope data suggest that the ore-forming materials were originated from deep crust. Integrated data indicate that both Duhuangling and Jiusangou gold deposits are medium- to high-temperature, hydrothermal gold deposits.
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 | 0.001 | 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".