MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W269683231

Effects of oxidation and weathering on pyrite chemistry, and implications for evaluating regional gold fertility of the Selwyn Basin, Yukon

2013· article· en· W269683231 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
PJ Sack, L Danyushevsky, SE Gilbert, RR Large, DD Gregory

Bibliographic record

VenueeCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPyriteGeologyGeochemistryOutcropLithologyMineralogyDiagenesisTrace element
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pyrite from surface outcrops and diamond drill core near sediment-hosted gold occurrences in the Selwyn basin have been analyzed using laser ablation-inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICPMS) . Samples from the orogenic gold 3Ace occurrence, in southeast Yukon, are interbedded fine-grained sandstones and silty black phyllites from the Neoproterozoic Hyland Group . Samples from the Carlin-type Conrad occurrence, in central-east Yukon, are dark grey to black shales from the Neoprotero-zoic Windermere Supergroup . Surface outcrop samples are representative of regional lithologies and are distal (>5 km) from known mineral occurrences . Diamond drill holes are distal, in a deposit sense, and show minor alteration and mineralization; samples are from barren intervals of shale and phyllite . LA-ICPMS spot analyses were all conducted on fresh pyrites, including unoxidized pyrites from weathered surface samples . All data are from microcrystalline pyrite nodules and framboids interpreted to have grown early in diagenesis . Forty-two major and trace element data from 118 spots are used in this comparison: from the 3Ace orogenic gold occurrence, 38 spots from four samples in 3A11-24A are compared against 11 spots from one surface sample; from the Conrad Carlin-type occurrence, 57 spots from six samples in OS11-70 are compared against 12 spots from one surface sample . Similar results between surface and core samples are defined as having approximately 25%, or more, overlap between the first and third quartiles of each element in the data set . From both occurrences, S, Ti, V, Cr, Co, Cu, Cd, Sn, Te, W, Pt, Au, Pb, and U are similar; at the Conrad occurrence, Mn, Ni, Zn, As, Se, Mo, Ag, Sb, and Bi are also similar; Tl is higher in surface than core data at the 3Ace occurrence and lower at the Conrad . At the 3Ace occurrence, Mn, Ni, Zn, and Sb are higher in core compared to surface data, whereas As, Se, Mo, and Bi are lower . With the exception of Tl, data between core and surface samples are similar . Thallium is a low temperature hydrothermal fluid indicator and the regional surface samples may not have been influenced by local hydrothermal conditions . There are more dissimilar elements between core and surface pyrite at the 3Ace oc-currence than the Conrad, but without systematic enrichment or depletion; this is interpreted as relating to differing original compositions of the pyrite, not weathering effects. Our preliminary conclusion is that careful selection of unoxidized pyrite in weathered surface samples yields LA-ICPMS results similar to those of pyrite collected from the same lithology in unweathered diamond drill core and, thus, surface sampling is a viable technique for measuring pyrite chemistry in shales . Recent work suggests that gold content, and possibly associated trace elements, of diagenetic pyrite may be used as a first order proxy for evaluating the regional gold fertility of sedimentary basins . We pro-pose to test this model using surface samples from the Selwyn basin in Yukon, which is known to have Carlin-type and Orogenic gold occurrences, as well as significant intrusion-related gold deposits and base metal 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 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)0.000
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 score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.183 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania)Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207