MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991670387 · doi:10.29173/ikc3300

Volcanology of Tuzo pipe (Gahcho Kué cluster) – root-diatreme processes re-interpreted

2019· article· en· W2991670387 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ioan Seghedi, Doris Maicher, Stephan Kurszlaukis

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Kimberlite Conference Extended Abstracts: 2008 · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiatremeVolcanologyCluster (spacecraft)Root (linguistics)Materials scienceGeologyComputer scienceSeismologyOperating systemGeophysicsPhilosophyVolcano

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Middle Cambrian (~ 540 Ma) Gahcho Kue Kimberlite Field is situated about 275 km ENE of Yellowknife, NWT, Canada. The kimberlites were emplaced into 2.6 Ga Archean granitic rocks of the Yellowknife Supergroup. Four larger kimberlite bodies (5034, Tesla, Tuzo, and Hearne) as well as a number of smaller pipes and associated sheets occur in the field. In plan view, the Tuzo pipe has a circular outline at the surface, and it widens towards deeper levels. The pipe infill consists of several types of coherent and fragmental kimberlite facies. Coherent or apparent coherent (possibly welded) kimberlite facies dominate at depth, but also occur at shallow levels, as dikes intruded late in the eruptive sequence or individual coherent kimberlite clasts. The central and shallower portions of the pipe consist of several fragmental kimberlite varieties that are texturally classified as Tuffisitic Kimberlites. The definition, geometry and extent of the geological units are complex and zones controlled by vertical elements are most significant. The fluidal outlines of some of the coherent kimberlite clasts suggest that at least some are the product of disruption of magma that was in a semi-plastic state or even of welded material. Ragged clasts at low levels are inferred to form part of a complex peperite-like system that intrudes the base of the root zone. A variable, often high abundance of local wall-rock xenoliths between and within the kimberlite phases is observed, varying in size from sub-millimeter to several tens of meters. Wall-rock fragments are common at all locations within the pipe but are especially frequent in a domain with a belt-like geometry between 120 and 200 m depth in the pipe. Steeply outward-dipping bedded deposits made up of wall-rock fragments occur in deep levels of the pipe and are especially common under the downward-widening roof segments. The gradational contact relationships of these deposits with the surrounding kimberlite-bearing rocks as well as their location suggest that they formed more-or-less in situ . Different breccia facies inside the pipe suggest an origin by slumping, grain flows, rock fall or pyroclastic deposition. The shape and facies architecture of the Tuzo pipe suggests that the studied section of the pipe lies at a root zone–diatreme transitional structural level. Composite coherent kimberlite clasts imply that recycling processes were active over time, while reworked wall-rock rich deposits and ductily-deformed clasts of welded kimberlite point to the presence of temporary cavities in the root zone. The emplacement of the Tuzo pipe did not occur in a single, violent explosion, but involved repetitive volcanic explosions alternating with periods of relative quiescence. The observed features are typical of phreatomagmatic processes, which may include phases of less-explosive magmatic activity.

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 score0.192
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Kimberlite Conference Extended Abstracts: 2008Same topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207