MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801839175 · doi:10.1038/s41467-017-02773-w

Platinum-bearing chromite layers are caused by pressure reduction during magma ascent

2018· article· en· W2801839175 on OpenAlexaff
Rais Latypov, Gelu Costin, Sofya Chistyakova, Emma J. Hunt, Ria Mukherjee, Tony Naldrett

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Research Foundation
KeywordsChromiteUltramafic rockPlatinum groupBasaltMaficGeologyGeochemistryChromititeMagmaMagma chamberPlatinumPetrologyVolcanoPaleontologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Platinum-bearing chromitites in mafic-ultramafic intrusions such as the Bushveld Complex are key repositories of strategically important metals for human society. Basaltic melts saturated in chromite alone are crucial to their generation, but the origin of such melts is controversial. One concept holds that they are produced by processes operating within the magma chamber, whereas another argues that melts entering the chamber were already saturated in chromite. Here we address the problem by examining the pressure-related changes in the topology of a Mg 2 SiO 4 –CaAl 2 Si 2 O 8 –SiO 2 –MgCr 2 O 4 quaternary system and by thermodynamic modelling of crystallisation sequences of basaltic melts at 1–10 kbar pressures. We show that basaltic melts located adjacent to a so-called chromite topological trough in deep-seated reservoirs become saturated in chromite alone upon their ascent towards the Earth’s surface and subsequent cooling in shallow-level chambers. Large volumes of these chromite-only-saturated melts replenishing these chambers are responsible for monomineralic layers of massive chromitites with associated platinum-group elements.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations99
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207