MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112140536

PGE, Au, Ni, Cr and Cu variations in the Komatiites from the Mahakoshal Greenstone Belt, central India

2010· other· en· W3112140536 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueRUNE (Research UNE) · 2010
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHermeneutics and Narrative Identity
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenstone beltGeologyGeochemistryArchean
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Komatiites are rare ultramafic volcanic rocks containing more than 18 wt % MgO (Arndt and Niusbet, 1982) that erupted mainly during the Archean and Early Proterozoic and less frequently in the Phanerozoic. The more recent examples tend to have lower MgO content than their Archean equivalents. Komatiites are also characterised by their low incompatiable element content which is consistent with their generation by high degrees of partial melting (30–50%). Komatiites are the hottest lavas erupted on earth (eruption temperatures 1400–1600°C), and therefore they provide important constraints on the composition and thermal structure of the Archean mantle (Sproule et al., 2002). The economic importance of komatiites was first widely recognised in the early 1960s with the discovery of massive nickel sulphide mineralisation at Kambalda, western Australia. Komatiite hosted nickel-copper sulphide mineralisation today accounts for about 14% of world's nickel production, mostly from Australia, Canada and South Africa. The Late Archean Mahakoshal greenstone belt (MGB) in central India is an intracontinental rift (~500 km long) filled with a thick metavolcano-sedimentary sequence. The rocks have undergone greenschist facies metamorphism and polyphase deformation. Komatiites occur in the central part of the MGB near Katni. They are cumulate rocks and are composed mainly of olivine associated with clinopyroxene and orthopyroxene.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.526
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.252 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRUNE (Research UNE)Same topicHermeneutics and Narrative IdentityFrench-language works237,207