Accessory Mineral Eu Anomalies in Suprasolidus Rocks: Beyond Feldspar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Accessory mineral Eu anomalies (Eu/Eu*) are routinely measured to infer changes in the amount of feldspar over time, allowing accessory mineral U‐Pb dates to be linked to the progressive crystallization of igneous and metamorphic rocks and, by extension, geodynamic processes. However, changes in Eu/Eu* can reflect any process that changes the relative availability of Eu2+ and Eu3+. We constructed partitioning budgets for Sm, Eu2+, Eu3+, and Gd in suprasolidus metasedimentary rocks to investigate processes that can influence accessory mineral Eu anomalies. We modeled three scenarios: (1) closed‐system, equilibrium crystallization; (2) fractionation of Eu by feldspar growth during melt crystallization; and (3) removal of Eu by melt extraction. In the closed‐system equilibrium model, accessory mineral Eu/Eu* changes as a function of fO2 and monazite stability; Eu/Eu* changes up to 0.3 over a pressure‐temperature range of 4–12 kbar and 700–950°C. Fractionation of Eu by feldspar growth is modeled to decrease accessory mineral Eu/Eu* by ~0.05–0.15 per 10 wt% feldspar crystallized. Melt extraction has a smaller effect; removal of 10% melt decreases accessory mineral Eu/Eu* in the residue by ≤0.05. Although these models demonstrate that fractionation of Eu by feldspar growth can be a dominant control on a rocks u budget, they also show that the common interpretation that Eu/Eu* only records feldspar growth and breakdown is an oversimplification that could lead to incorrect interpretation about the duration and rates of tectonic processes. Consideration of other processes that influence Eu anomalies will allow for a broader range of geological processes to be investigated by petrochronology.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".