Fenites associated with carbonatite complexes: A review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carbonatites and alkaline-silicate rocks are the most important sources of rare earth elements (REE) and niobium (Nb), both of which are metals imperative to technological advancement and associated with high risks of supply interruption. Cooling and crystallizing carbonatitic and alkaline melts expel multiple pulses of alkali-rich aqueous fluids which metasomatize the surrounding country rocks, forming fenites during a process called fenitization. These alkalis and volatiles are original constituents of the magma that are not recorded in the carbonatite rock, and therefore fenites should not be dismissed during the description of a carbonatite system. This paper reviews the existing literature, focusing on 17 worldwide carbonatite complexes whose attributes are used to discuss the main features and processes of fenitization. Although many attempts have been made in the literature to categorize and name fenites, it is recommended that the IUGS metamorphic nomenclature be used to describe predominant mineralogy and textures. Complexing anions greatly enhance the solubility of REE and Nb in these fenitizing fluids, mobilizing them into the surrounding country rock, and precipitating REE- and Nb-enriched micro-mineral assemblages. As such, fenites have significant potential to be used as an exploration tool to find mineralized intrusions in a similar way alteration patterns are used in other ore systems, such as porphyry copper deposits. Strong trends have been identified between the presence of more complex veining textures, mineralogy and brecciation in fenites with intermediate stage Nb-enriched and later stage REE-enriched magmas. However, compiling this evidence has also highlighted large gaps in the literature relating to fenitization. These need to be addressed before fenite can be used as a comprehensive and effective exploration tool.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".