MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2986483446 · doi:10.5382/rev.17.03

Komatiite-Associated Ni-Cu-(PGE) Deposits, Abitibi Greenstone Belt, Superior Province, Canada

2011· book-chapter· en· W2986483446 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M G Houlé, C. Michael Lesher

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeochemistryArcheanGeologyFlood basaltPartial meltingBasaltMantle (geology)CrustTectonicsVolcanismPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magmatic sulfide deposits fall into two major groups when considered on the basis of the value of their contained metals, one group in which Ni, and, to a lesser extent, Cu, are the most valuable products and a second in which the PGE are the most important. The first group includes komatiite- (both Archean and Paleoproterozoic), flood basalt-, ferropicrite-, and anorthosite complex-related deposits, a miscellaneous group related to high Mg basalts, Sudbury, which is the only example related to a meteorite impact melt, and a group of hitherto uneconomic deposits related to Ural-Alaskan–type intrusions. PGE deposits are mostly related to large intrusions comprising both an early MgO- and SiO2-rich magma and a later Al2O3-rich, tholeiitic magma, although several other intrusive types contain PGE in lesser, mostly uneconomic quantities. Most Ni-rich deposits occur in rocks ranging from the Late Archean to the Mesozoic. PGE deposits tend to predominate in Late Archean to Paleoproterozoic intrusions, although the limited number of occurrences casts doubt on the statistical validity of this observation.A number of key events mark the development of a magmatic sulfide deposit, partial melting of the mantle, ascent into the crust, development of sulfide immisciblity as a result of crustal interaction, ascent of magma + sulfides to higher crustal levels, concentration of the sulfides, their enrichment through interaction with fresh magma (not always the case), cooling and crystallization. Factors governing this development include (1) the solubility of sulfur in silicate melts and how this varies as a function of partial mantle melting and subsequent fractional crystallization, (2) the partitioning of chalcophile metals between sulfide and silicate liquids, and how the results of this vary during mantle melting and subsequent crystallization and sulfide immiscibility (degree of melting and crystallization, R factor and subsequent enrichment), (3) how effectively the sulfides become concentrated and the factors controlling this, and (4) processes that occur during the cooling of the sulfide liquid that govern aspects of exploration and mineral beneficiation. These topics are discussed first in general terms and then with specific reference to deposits at Noril'sk, Kambalda, and Voisey's Bay. With regard to Voisey's Bay, quantitative modeling is consistent with the very low PGE concentrations in this deposit being the result of some sulfide having been left behind in the mantle during partial melting. Both the Noril'sk and Voisey's Bay deposits are shown to be economic because of subsequent upgrading of the

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.152
Teacher spread0.141 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations24
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological and Geochemical Analysis→French-language works237,207→