MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980694227 · doi:10.5382/av100.09

Platinum Group Element, Chromium, and Vanadium Deposits in Mafic and Ultramafic Rocks

2005· book-chapter· en· W2980694227 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
R. Grant Cawthorn, Stephen J. Barnes, Christian Ballhaus, К. N. Malitch

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlatinum groupUltramafic rockMaficPublishingPolitical scienceGeologyGeochemistryLibrary scienceLawChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Most deposits of platinum group elements (PGE), chromite, and vanadiferous magnetite occur in mafic intrusions. Several represent some of the most laterally continuous and uniform, in terms of grade and thickness, of all orebodies. Such continuity presents one of the major challenges to orebody modeling, in that any proposed process must be able to operate uniformly across enormous areas within a magma chamber. Their size also creates a mass-balance problem, especially for Cr, in that the required source reservoir for some deposits exceeds the size of the currently preserved intrusive body. Whether chromitite layers result from magma addition (with three options for the compositions of the added magma—ultrabasic, plagioclase rich, or siliceous melt), changes in oxygen, water, or total pressure, or some other process has yet to be demonstrated definitely. Podiform chromitite deposits in ophiolites possibly owe their genesis to concentration from basic magma by an aqueous phase. Some models for PGE mineralization mimic those listed for chromitite layers. The mineralization may be primary magmatic, accumulating with the silicate phases, either in some association with sulfide liquid, chromite, or independently, or it may postdate silicate accumulation, having been extracted from very low grade PGE source in vertical sections of footwall cumulates. Identifying definitive criteria to support or negate these processes proves elusive. The abundance of orthopyroxene over clinopyroxene in ultramafic cumulates, and a transition from ultramafic (with Cr-rich pyroxene) to mafic rocks (Cr-poor pyroxene), are two common, but not universal, features of stratiform PGE deposits. Vanadium strongly partitions into magnetite, which forms the major source of this metal. Models for the genesis of magnetitite layers often have a strong analogy with hypotheses about chromitite layers, but fundamental differences do exist, most prominent being the lack of any evidence for magma addition relating to magnetite formation. Density sorting of cumulus minerals is more plausible for magnetite than from chromite deposits. Hypotheses for the origin of PGE, Cr, and Vmineralization have been strongly influenced by observations on the Bushveld Complex that hosts well over half the world’s resources in all these commodities. Such dominance possibly impedes the development of models that might have applicability in other intrusions but where current economic nonviability reduces their apparent significance.

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)0.001
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations124
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207