Geology, lithogeochemistry, and significance of porphyry intrusions associated with gold mineralization within the Timmins–Porcupine gold camp, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Timmins–Porcupine gold camp, Abitibi greenstone belt, is host >60 Moz of Au with many gold deposits spatially associated with porphyry intrusions and the Porcupine–Destor deformation zone (PDDZ). Porphyry intrusions form three suites. The Timmins porphyry suite (TIS) consists of high-Al tonalite–trondjhemite–granodiorite (TTG) with calc–alkalic affinities and high La/Yb ratios and formed during ∼2690 Ma D1-related crustal thickening and hydrous partial melting of mafic crust where garnet and hornblende were stable in the residue. The Carr Township porphyry intrusive suite (CIS) and the granodiorite intrusive suite (GIS) also have high-Al TTG, calc-alkalic affinities, but were generated 10–15 million years after the TIS; the CIS were generated at shallower depths (during postorogenic extension?) with no garnet in the crustal residue, whereas the GIS formed during D2 thrust-related crustal thickening and partial melting where garnet was stable in the residue. Gold mineralization is preferentially associated with the TIS, and to a lesser extent the GIS, proximal to the PDDZ. Intrusions near mineralization have abundant sericite, carbonate, and sulphide alteration. These intrusions exhibit low Na2O and Sr, and high Al2O3/Na2O, K2O, K2O/Na2O, Rb, and Cs, (i.e., potassic alteration); sulfide- and carbonate-altered porphyries have high (CaO + MgO + Fe2O3)/Al2O3 and LOI values. Although porphyries are not genetically related to gold mineralization, they are spatially related and are interpreted to reflect the emplacement of intrusions and subsequent Au-bearing fluids along the same crustal structures. The intrusive rocks also served as structural traps, where gold mineralization precipitated in dilatant structures along the margins of intrusions during regional (D3?) deformation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".