The Rustenburg Layered Suite formed as a stack of mush with transient magma chambers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Rustenburg Layered Suite of the Bushveld Complex of South Africa is a vast layered accumulation of mafic and ultramafic rocks. It has long been regarded as a textbook result of fractional crystallization from a melt-dominated magma chamber. Here, we show that most units of the Rustenburg Layered Suite can be derived with thermodynamic models of crustal assimilation by komatiitic magma to form magmatic mushes without requiring the existence of a magma chamber. Ultramafic and mafic cumulate layers below the Upper and Upper Main Zone represent multiple crystal slurries produced by assimilation-batch crystallization in the upper and middle crust, whereas the chilled marginal rocks represent complementary supernatant liquids. Only the uppermost third formed via lower-crustal assimilation-fractional crystallization and evolved by fractional crystallization within a melt-rich pocket. Layered intrusions need not form in open magma chambers. Mineral deposits hitherto attributed to magma chamber processes might form in smaller intrusions of any geometric form, from mushy systems entirely lacking melt-dominated magma chambers.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".