MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889866924 · doi:10.5382/rev.19.04

Physical Volcanology of Komatiites and Ni-Cu-(PGE) Deposits of the Southern Abitibi Greenstone Belt

2017· article· en· W2889866924 on OpenAlexaff
M G Houlé, C. Michael Lesher, S. Préfontaine

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsLaurentian UniversityGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenstone beltGeologyGeochemistryVolcanologyArcheanVolcano

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Komatiitic rocks occur mainly in Archean greenstone belts, less commonly in Paleoproterozoic volcano-sedimentary belts, and only rarely in younger volcanic settings. As in most other greenstone belts worldwide, komatiitic rocks are locally abundant in the Abitibi greenstone belt but generally represent only a small proportion of the volcanic rocks in the volcanic succession. Although only locally exposed, glacially sculpted exposures of only weakly metamorphosed and mildly deformed komatiites of mineralized and unmineralized komatiites in the Abitibi greenstone belt are among the best in the world, characterized by excellent textural preservation and, in some cases, excellent mineralogical preservation. Komatiitic rocks in the Abitibi greenstone belt occur predominantly within the Pacaud (2750–2735 Ma), Stoughton-Roquemaure (2723–2720 Ma), Kidd-Munro (2720–2710 Ma), and Tisdale (2710–2704 Ma) assemblages, but have recently also been recognized in lesser abundances within the Deloro (2734–2724 Ma) and Porcupine (≤2690–≤2685 Ma) assemblages. Overall, the komatiitic rocks present in these assemblages are characterized by a wide variety of lithofacies (textural, compositional) and flow facies; however, a regional analysis of komatiite physical volcanology reveals some fundamental differences between each of the komatiite-bearing assemblages. The Kidd-Munro and Tisdale komatiite-bearing assemblages contain the largest volumes of komatiitic rocks, in particular thick, highly magnesian cumulate lava channels and channelized sheet flows. This suggests that the magma discharge rates were higher for these assemblages and/or that they formed more proximal to the eruptive site. However, the recently discovered Grasset Ni-Cu-(PGE) deposit hosted within relatively high MgO cumulate rocks that are interpreted to occur within the Deloro assemblage highlights the possibility of the other komatiite-bearing assemblages to contain similarly prospective volcanic and/or subvolcanic facies. Geochemical data indicate that regardless of age or petrogenetic affinity (Al-undepleted vs. Al-depleted vs. Ti-enriched vs. Fe-rich), almost all of the parental magmas were undersaturated in sulfide prior to emplacement and therefore represent favorable magma sources for Ni-Cu-(PGE) mineralization. Volcanological data indicate that almost all komatiite-associated Ni-Cu-(PGE) deposits in the Abitibi greenstone belt appear to be localized in lava channels or channelized sheet flows, which have the capacity to thermomechanically erode S-bearing country rocks and to efficiently transfer metals from the magma to sulfide xenomelts. Three type localities (Spinifex Ridge in La Motte Township, Pyke Hill in Munro Township, and Alexo in Dundonald Township) illustrate how physical volcanology (lava channelization) and stratigraphic environment (S source) need to operate quasi-simultaneously to allow for the genesis of significant amounts of Ni-Cu-(PGE) sulfides within a komatiitic succession. As not all komatiite magma pathways are mineralized, one of the most important challenges is to be able to distinguish potentially mineralized successions from barren successions.

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 score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207