MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2614164622 · doi:10.1144/geochem2016-463

Lithogeochemical classification of igneous rocks using Streckeisen ternary diagrams

2017· article· en· W2614164622 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeochemistry Exploration Environment Analysis · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsAcadia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIgneous rockGeochemistryGeologyTernary plotTernary operationPetrologyMineralogyComputer scienceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mineral deposit models strategically guide exploration. The lithologies from which these models are built have genetic connotations. Thus, rock classification must be accurate to ensure that mineral exploration is effective and successful. Rock classification is based on mineral proportions, and these are commonly determined by: (1) visual inspection, which is subject to large errors; (2) point counting, which is tedious and time-consuming; (3) image analysis of stained slabs or polished thin sections, which is expensive and constrained by the availability of appropriate stains; and (4) image analysis of spectrometric data, which is expensive. These features make rock classification difficult and undermine its quality, thereby negatively impacting geological conclusions and mineral exploration results. A novel alternative procedure for igneous rock classification involves using whole rock lithogeochemical data for classification on Streckeisen ternary diagrams. This approach employs several calculations that transform: (1) mass-based element concentrations (the original lithogeochemical data produced by the laboratory) sequentially into (2) unstandardized (do not sum to unity) molar element numbers; (3) unstandardized molar mineral numbers; (4) unstandardized volume mineral numbers; and finally (5) standardized (closed; sum to unity) volume mineral concentrations that estimate the mineral modes in rocks. These mineral mode estimates can then be plotted on (projected onto) Streckeisen ternary diagrams, to classify the rocks in the normal manner. This new approach has advantages over conventional classification strategies, in that it is relatively inexpensive, adaptable to all forms of igneous rocks, quantitative, accurate, and precise. Required petrographic information necessary to conduct such a classification includes only knowledge of chemical formulae of the ‘essential’ mineral assemblage. Essential minerals are, here, considered those minerals having concentrations exceeding 5% in 5% of the rocks under consideration. This criterion allows this lithogeochemical classification procedure to be applicable to a wide variety of igneous rocks. This lithogeochemical classification procedure has additional applications beyond the classification of plutonic igneous rocks. For example, if an essential mineral assemblage can be identified or hypothesized, classification of felsic or mafic volcanic rocks can also be achieved. Additionally, an essential mineral assemblage does not have to consist exclusively of igneous minerals. As a result, conversion from molar element numbers to molar mineral numbers can be undertaken using many mineral assemblages. This allows analogous lithogeochemical classification to be undertaken for almost any rock type (e.g. clastic sedimentary rocks, using the calculated proportions of quartz, feldspar, and clay minerals). Consequently, lithogeochemical calculation of the essential mineral modes in rocks can be used to establish mineral zoning maps in space or time, allowing exploration geoscientists to create down-hole logs depicting hydrothermal alteration mineral abundances, or surface maps of hydrothermal alteration zones on a mineral property. To demonstrate this new procedure, results from classifications of metaluminous, peraluminous, and alkaline felsic plutonic and volcanic rocks, and mafic and ultramafic plutonic and volcanic rocks are compared with mineral modes acquired by independent means (visual estimates, point counts, image analysis, spectrometry). These case studies demonstrate that the proposed lithogeochemical classification procedure is as or more accurate than conventional classification methods. Furthermore, because lithogeochemical samples are far larger, and thus more representative than the surfaces used to estimate mineral modes by conventional means, this lithogeochemical classification procedure is also far more precise. The resulting classification is thus especially effective when working with fine-grained rocks where mineral identification and volume estimation is difficult.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.210 · 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