MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123653665 · doi:10.1007/s00126-020-01039-8

Geochemical signatures of mineralizing events in the Juomasuo Au–Co deposit, Kuusamo belt, northeastern Finland

2021· article· en· W3123653665 on OpenAlexaff
Mikael Vasilopoulos, Ferenc Molnár, Hugh O’Brien, Yann Lahaye, Marie G. Lefebvre, Antonin Richard, Anne‐Sylvie André‐Mayer, Jukka-Pekka Ranta, M. Talikka

Bibliographic record

VenueMineralium Deposita · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsSt. John’s Health Sciences Centre
FundersK. H. Renlunds stiftelseSuomen KulttuurirahastoSuomalainen Tiedeakatemia
KeywordsGeologyGeochemistryGreenschistProtolithFelsicMaficMineralization (soil science)PetrographyPyritePyrrhotiteArsenopyriteHypogeneMetamorphic rockChalcopyriteSphaleriteChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Juomasuo Au–Co deposit, currently classified as an orogenic gold deposit with atypical metal association, is located in the Paleoproterozoic Kuusamo belt in northeastern Finland. The volcano-sedimentary sequence that hosts the deposit was intensely altered, deformed, and metamorphosed to greenschist facies during the 1.93–1.76 Ga Svecofennian orogeny. In this study, we investigate the temporal relationship between Co and Au deposition and the relationship of metal enrichment with protolith composition and alteration mineralogy by utilizing lithogeochemical data and petrographic observations. We also investigate the nature of fluids involved in deposit formation based on sulfide trace element and sulfur isotope LA-ICP-MS data together with tourmaline mineral chemistry and boron isotopes. Classification of original protoliths was made on the basis of geochemically immobile elements; recognized lithologies are metasedimentary rocks, mafic, intermediate-composition, and felsic metavolcanic rocks, and an ultramafic sill. The composition of the host rocks does not control the type or intensity of mineralization. Sulfur isotope values (δ 34 S − 2.6 to + 7.1‰) and trace element data obtained for pyrite, chalcopyrite, and pyrrhotite indicate that the two geochemically distinct Au–Co and Co ore types formed from fluids of different compositions and origins. A reduced, metamorphic fluid was responsible for deposition of the pyrrhotite-dominant, Co-rich ore, whereas a relatively oxidized fluid deposited the pyrite-dominant Au–Co ore. The main alteration and mineralization stages at Juomasuo are as follows: (1) widespread albitization that predates both types of mineralization; (2) stage 1, Co-rich mineralization associated with chlorite (± biotite ± amphibole) alteration; (3) stage 2, Au–Co mineralization related to sericitization. Crystal-chemical compositions for tourmaline suggest the involvement of evaporite-related fluids in formation of the deposit; boron isotope data also allow for this conclusion. Results of our research indicate that the metal association in the Juomasuo Au–Co deposit was formed by spatially coincident and multiple hydrothermal processes.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.921

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations31
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineralium DepositaSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207