Linking the Siberian Flood Basalts and Giant Ni‐Cu‐PGE Sulfide Deposits at Norilsk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The world‐class magmatic sulfide deposits in the Norilsk region exhibit a remarkable spatial and temporal association with the Siberian large igneous province (LIP). However, the details of the causal connection between the Siberian LIP and the ore deposits have remained contentious. Here we address the problem by modeling of assimilation, crystallization and flow behavior of magmas based on aggregated data from the Norilsk camp. Crustal assimilation at depth by mantle‐derived picritic magma can account for the compositional and isotopic variations of the early tholeiitic basalts and the sequestering of sulfide liquid in a mid‐crustal conduit system. When the rate and volume of asthenospheric magma production dramatically increased, the metal tenors of the mid‐crustal sulfide reservoir were first upgraded by consequent reaction with the fresh, undepleted magmas, then entrained and flushed to higher crustal levels. The resulting sulfide‐rich emulsions were too dense to reach the surface to form lavas but were instead emplaced in multiple pulses within blind sill‐like bodies at shallow depth. Sulfide ores transported from the mid‐crust were deposited at the bases of the upper‐crustal sills, where sedimentary host rocks were assimilated wholesale by the already sulfide‐charged replenishing magmas; this shallow assimilation was itself not instrumental in forming the ores. Although the evolution and dynamics of flood basalts are thus inextricably linked with coeval subvolcanic economic intrusions, the mineralization itself is argued not to occupy feeders with direct links to the overlying lavas, suggesting major implications for exploration in other LIPs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".