MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090644939 · doi:10.12789/geocanj.2020.47.162

Igneous Rock Associations 26. Lamproites, Exotic Potassic Alkaline Rocks: A Review of their Nomenclature, Characterization and Origins

2020· review· en· W3090644939 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeoscience Canada · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersLakehead University
KeywordsLeucitePhlogopiteGeochemistryGeologyKimberlitePetrogenesisOlivineUltramafic rockMantle (geology)PyroxeneIgneous rockChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lamproite is a rare ultrapotassic alkaline rock of petrological importance as it is considered to be derived from metasomatized lithospheric mantle, and of economic significance, being the host of major diamond deposits. A review of the nomenclature of lamproite results in the recommendation that members of the lamproite petrological clan be named using mineralogical-genetic classifications to distinguish them from other genetically unrelated potassic alkaline rocks, kimberlite, and diverse lamprophyres. The names “Group 2 kimberlite” and “orangeite” must be abandoned as these rock types are varieties of bona fide lamproite restricted to the Kaapvaal Craton. Lamproites exhibit extreme diversity in their mineralogy which ranges from olivine phlogopite lamproite, through phlogopite leucite lamproite and potassic titanian richterite-diopside lamproite, to leucite sanidine lamproite. Diamondiferous olivine lamproites are hybrid rocks extensively contaminated by mantle-derived xenocrystic olivine. Currently, lamproites are divided into cratonic (e.g. Leucite Hills, USA; Baifen, China) and orogenic (Mediterranean) varieties (e.g. Murcia-Almeria, Spain; Afyon, Turkey; Xungba, Tibet). Each cratonic and orogenic lamproite province differs significantly in tectonic setting and Sr–Nd–Pb–Hf isotopic compositions. Isotopic compositions indicate derivation from enriched mantle sources, having long-term low Sm/Nd and high Rb/Sr ratios, relative to bulk earth and depleted asthenospheric mantle. All lamproites are considered, on the basis of their geochemistry, to be derived from ancient mineralogically complex K–Ti–Ba–REE-rich veins, or metasomes, in the lithospheric mantle with, or without, subsequent contributions from recent asthenospheric or subducted components at the time of genesis. Lamproite primary magmas are considered to be relatively silica-rich (~50–60 wt.% SiO2), MgO-poor (3–12 wt.%), and ultrapotassic (~8–12 wt.% K2O) as exemplified by hyalo-phlogopite lamproites from the Leucite Hills (Wyoming) or Smoky Butte (Montana). Brief descriptions are given of the most important phreatomagmatic diamondiferous lamproite vents. The tectonic processes which lead to partial melting of metasomes, and/or initiation of magmatism, are described for examples of cratonic and orogenic lamproites. As each lamproite province differs with respect to its mineralogy, geochemical evolution, and tectonic setting there is no simple or common petrogenetic model for their genesis. Each province must be considered as the unique expression of the times and vagaries of ancient mantle metasomatism, coupled with diverse and complex partial melting processes, together with mixing of younger asthenospheric and lithospheric material, and, in the case of many orogenic lamproites, with Paleogene to Recent subducted material.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.191 · 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