The reaction history of kyanite in high‐<i>P</i> aluminous granulites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cathodoluminescence ( CL ) mapping of kyanite in high pressure, aluminous granulites from the central Grenville Province reveals internal structures that are linked to their metamorphic reaction history. In two samples, individual kyanite crystals are shown to be composite porphyroblasts comprising three distinct generations, defined by their CL intensity and Cr (±V, Ti, Fe and Ga) content, and each separated by resorbed interfaces. In contrast, a sub‐aluminous sample contains two types of kyanite, one as resorbed inclusions in garnet and another in the groundmass or replacing garnet. These textural variants of kyanite are interpreted within the framework of phase equilibria modelling. In P–T pseudosections, a first generation of kyanite, which is only present in the most aluminous samples, is potentially linked to staurolite breakdown, and its resorption is consistent with a subsequent increase in pressure. This kyanite represents the earliest remnant of prograde metamorphism identifiable in these rocks. The second generation, present in the porphyroblasts in the same samples and as inclusions in garnet in the sub‐aluminous sample, is interpreted to be the peritectic product of muscovite dehydration melting. Resorption of this kyanite is consistent with subsequent continuous dehydration melting of biotite, which is also inferred based on microstructural considerations. The final generation of kyanite, present as rims on the prograde kyanite porphyroblasts in aluminous samples and as part of the groundmass or replacing garnet in the sub‐aluminous rock, is interpreted to have grown during melt crystallization upon retrogression. The presence of retrograde kyanite implies that the melt crystallized over a wide range of temperatures, and provides an important constraint on the P–T conditions of the metamorphic peak and on the retrograde P–T path. CL mapping is crucial for identifying retrograde kyanite in aluminous samples, as it preferentially overgrows existing kyanite rather than replacing other prograde phases. The scarcity of kyanite in sub‐aluminous rocks allows retrograde kyanite to grow as discrete crystals that can be identified by optical microscopy. This work attests to the potential of unconventional tools such as CL imaging for deciphering the metamorphic history of rocks.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".