Inherited Eocene magmatic tourmaline captured by the Miocene Himalayan leucogranites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Miocene Cuonadong leucogranites in the easternmost section of the Tethyan Himalaya, Southern Tibet, are characterized by two types of tourmaline. Tourmaline occurs as needle-like crystals in the two-mica ± tourmaline granites (Tur G) and large patches in the pegmatites (Tur P). Both the granite and the pegmatites yield Miocene ages (ca. 20 Ma) based on monazite U(-Th)-Pb dating, whereas 40Ar/39Ar geochronology of the coarse-grained tourmalines (Tur P) crosscut by pegmatite veins yielded an Eocene mini-plateau age of 43 ± 6 Ma. Major element concentrations of tourmaline indicate that both Tur P and Tur G belong to the schorl group with a magmatic origin, but trace elements such as V indicate that they are not cogenetic. Boron isotopes suggest that Tur P (average –9.76‰) was derived from typical crustal sources, whereas Tur G (average –7.65‰) contains relatively more mafic input. The capture of Eocene tourmaline by the Miocene leucogranites at Cuonadong suggests that the crustally derived Eocene magmatism may have occurred in the southern Tethyan Himalaya. Identification of the inherited magmatic tourmaline (Tur P), although not common, challenges the current application of tourmaline chemistry to the investigation of magmatic-hydrothermal systems.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".