Interaction between mafic dike rocks and salt deposits in the Rhine Graben, southwest Germany
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Dikes of primitive olivine melilitites and monchiquites intruded into an Oligocene (Rupelian) potash salt deposit near Buggingen (SW Germany). Ocelli and amygdules reveal distinct mineral assemblages depending on whether the dike rocks are in direct contact with the potash layer or with bituminous shales (Fish Shale). Samples in contact with the potash salt layer show roundish textures that contain smectite ± talc ± chlorite, calcite, and in cases anhydrite and halite, while those close to the bituminous shale mainly comprise smectite, calcite, zeolite group minerals, and analcime. No textural or mineralogical evidence for high-temperature (magmatic) interaction between the dike rocks and the evaporites was observed. This is presumably related to (1) a very low magmatic water activity in the magma, which prevented exsolution of aqueous fluids and appreciable dissolution of the salt, and (2) fast cooling of the magmas, inhibiting melting of the salt deposits and potential liquid mingling and/or assimilation processes. Halite formation in the dike rocks is, rather, related to later, post-magmatic hydrothermal fluids that previously interacted with the salt-rich host rocks. Alteration of the initially glassy groundmass to smectites and zeolites caused an enrichment of Na in the residual fluid, but halite saturation was not attained, as indicated by the absence of groundmass halite. Only fluid–rock interaction in millimeter-sized vugs caused halite precipitation via desiccation by swelling of previously formed clay minerals. Locally, the boron silicate datolite formed in pseudomorphs after olivine. Its precipitation was controlled by the Si and B supply provided by the breakdown of serpentine and smectite.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".