Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The formation of large porphyry Cu deposits requires shallow intrusion of felsic stocks that are injected into the focused sites of the mineralization. The parental magmas for these igneous rocks are oxidized, with a f O 2 above FMQ + 2 (2 logarithmic units above f O 2 of fayalite‐magnetite‐quartz buffer), which enables the magmas to transport large amounts of S and metals. The Japanese islands contain continental and island‐arc magmatic belts of various ages, from Mesozoic to recent, that were formed in response to westward subduction of oceanic plates. Mesozoic–Paleocene magmatism formed arcs on the eastern margin of Eurasia before the opening of the Sea of Japan. The back‐arc rifting that formed the Sea of Japan separated these igneous rocks from Eurasia, with their relics exposed as volcano–plutonic belts in Japan. Among these, the San‐in belt is the only representative of an upper crustal section that includes magnetite‐bearing granitic rocks. The opening of the Sea of Japan was accompanied by the asthenospheric mantle upwelling and eruption of oceanic magma. This was followed by extensive Miocene submarine volcanic activity that formed the Green Tuff belt. The current configuration of the Japanese islands was established in Pliocene. Young arcs, such as the Kuril, Izu‐Bonin, and Ryukyu arcs, are largely composed of mafic magmas, with accompanying asthenospheric upwelling in back‐arc extension. As the asthenospheric mantle and associated magmas have a reduced f O 2 , below FMQ (fayalite‐magnetite‐quartz buffer), continual upwelling of asthenospheric mantle creates limited areas of potential porphyry Cu mineralization in Japanese islands. Possible prospective areas include young stratovolcanoes in Honshu and Kyushu islands. Fertile rocks that may be associated with porphyry Cu mineralization can be identified by evaluating their magmatic oxidation conditions through mineralogical and mineral chemistry studies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".