Mineralogy of the baotite-bearing Gundrapalli lamproite, Nalgonda district, Telangana, India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We describe the mineralogy of a lamproite dyke from Gundrapalli village (Nalgonda district), Telangana, India. The dyke consists of a mineral assemblage characteristic of lamproites in terms of the presence of amphiboles (mainly potassic-richterite together with potassic-arfvedsonite, magnesio-riebeckite, Ti-rich potassic-magnesio-arfvedsonite, potassic-magnesio-arfvedsonite, katophorite and potassic-ferri-katophorite), Al-poor pyroxene, phlogopite (Ti-rich, Al-poor), pseudomorphed leucite, spinel (chromite-magnesiochromite), fluorapatite, baryte, titanite, rutile, barytocalcite, calcite, ilmenite, hydro-zircon, baotite, strontianite, allanite, quartz and pyrite. The absence of wadeite and priderite have been compensated for by the presence of baotite, rutile, titanite, baryte and hydro-zircons. The presence of the secondary phases: allanite, hydro-zircon, chlorite, quartz and cryptocrystalline silica, implies that the dyke has undergone deuteric alteration. On the basis of its typomorphic mineralogy the Gundrapalli dyke has been classified as a pseudoleucite-phlogopite-amphibole-lamproite. We report the presence of the rare mineral baotite from this lamproite, the first recognition of baotite from a lamproite in India. The mineralogy of the baotite-bearing Gundrapalli lamproite is analogous to the baotite-bearing Kvaløya lamproite from Troms, Norway.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".