MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213886857 · doi:10.1130/ges02086.1

Porphyry copper deposit formation in arcs: What are the odds?

2021· article· en· W3213886857 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeosphere · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyPorphyry copper depositGeochemistryHydrothermal circulationBatholithMagmaPlatinum groupSulfideFluid inclusionsVolcanoTectonicsChemistryPlatinum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Arc magmas globally are H2O-Cl-S–rich and moderately oxidized (ΔFMQ = +1 to +2) relative to most other mantle-derived magmas (ΔFMQ ≤ 0). Their relatively high oxidation state limits the extent to which sulfide phases separate from the magma, which would otherwise tend to deplete the melt in chalcophile elements such as Cu (highly siderophile elements such as Au and especially platinum-group elements are depleted by even small amounts of sulfide segregation). As these magmas rise into the crust and begin to crystallize, they will reach volatile saturation, and a hydrous, saline, S-rich, moderately oxidized fluid is released, into which chalcophile and any remaining siderophile metals (as well as many other water-soluble elements) will strongly partition. This magmatic-hydrothermal fluid phase has the potential to form ore deposits (most commonly porphyry Cu ± Mo ± Au deposits) if its metal load is precipitated in economic concentrations, but there are many steps along the way that must be successfully negotiated before this can occur. This paper seeks to identify the main steps along the path from magma genesis to hydrothermal mineral precipitation that affect the chances of forming an ore deposit (defined as an economically mineable resource) and attempts to estimate the probability of achieving each step. The cumulative probability of forming a large porphyry Cu deposit at any given time in an arc magmatic system (i.e., a single batholith-linked volcanoplutonic complex) is estimated to be ~0.001%, and less than 1/10 of these deposits will be uplifted and exposed at shallow enough depths to mine economically (0.0001%). Continued uplift and erosion in active convergent tectonic regimes rapidly remove these upper-crustal deposits from the geological record, such that the probability of finding them in older arc systems decreases further with age, to the point that porphyry Cu deposits are almost nonexistent in Precambrian rocks. A key finding of this paper is that most volcanoplutonic arcs above subduction zones are prospective for porphyry ore formation, with probabilities only falling to low values at late stages of magmatic-hydrothermal fluid exsolution, focusing, and metal deposition. This is in part because of the high threshold required in terms of grade and tonnage for a deposit to be considered economic. Thus, the probability of forming a porphyry-type system in any given arc segment is relatively high, but the probability that it will be a large economic deposit is low, dictated to a large extent by mineral economics and metal prices.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.168 · 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