MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015175027 · doi:10.3390/min10040316

U–Pb Dating and Trace Element Composition of Zircons from the Gujiao Ore-Bearing Intrusion, Shanxi, China: Implications for Timing and Mineralization of the Guojialiang Iron Skarn Deposit

2020· article· en· W3015175027 on OpenAlexaff
Zeguang Chang, Guochen Dong, Alireza Karimzadeh Somarin

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerals · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSkarnZirconGeochemistryGeologyMineral redox bufferQuartz monzoniteMineralization (soil science)CratonPlutonIron oreTrace elementMantle (geology)TectonicsHydrothermal circulationMetallurgyFluid inclusions

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Gujiao ore field, located in the middle segment of the Lüliang Mountain in central North China Craton (NCC), is one of iron skarn deposits of western iron belt in China. The U–Pb dating results of zircon by LA-ICP-MS suggest that the ore-related monzonite from the Guojialiang deposit was formed at 129.7 ± 1.7 Ma, early Cretaceous, which is consistent with the timing of iron skarn deposits in the Handan–Xingtai district of western iron belt. The zircons of monzonite present notable positive Ce anomalies (Ce/Ce* = 23.38–45.85), high Ce4+/Ce3+ values (154–385) and relatively high oxygen fugacity (fO2 = −13.09 to −15.36), and yield relatively low Ti-in-zircon temperatures. The physico-chemical conditions of the Guojialiang deposit were quite similar to these of ore-bearing plutons in the Handan-Xingtai district. The ore-bearing magmas are derived from the enriched lithospheric mantle with crustal material contribution, which played key role in oxidation state of the magma and the iron mineralization in the western iron belt.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.553
Threshold uncertainty score0.677

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineralsSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207