Electron Probe Microanalysis and Microscopy of Polishing-Exposed Solid-Phase Mineral Inclusions in Fuxian Kimberlite Diamonds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solid-phase mineral inclusions in diamond (1–3 mm in diameter) from the No. 50 kimberlite diatreme of Liaoning Province, China, were exposed by polishing. A variety of silicate, carbonate and sulfide inclusions were recovered in the diamond. The common solid-phase inclusions are olivine, chromite, garnet and orthopyroxene; the rare phases include Ca carbonate, magnesite, dolomite, norsethite, pyrrhotite, pentlandite, troilite, a member of the linnaeite group, an unknown hydrous magnesium silicate and an Fe-rich phase. Abundance and composition of the solid-phase inclusions in diamond indicate that they belong to the peridotitic suite and are mainly harzburgitic. No eclogitic mineral inclusions were found in the diamond. The slightly lower Mg # of the olivine inclusions (peak at 93) than that of harzburgitic olivine inclusions worldwide (Mg # peak at 94), the higher Ni content (0.25–0.45 wt. %) of the olivine inclusions than those of olivine inclusions worldwide (0.30–0.40 wt. %), the higher Ti contents (up to 0.79 wt. %) in some chromite inclusions in diamond than those in chromite inclusions worldwide, the existence of carbonate inclusions in diamond, and the possible presence of hydrous silicate phases in diamond all indicate a metasomatic enrichment event in the source region of diamond beneath the North China craton, suggesting that the diamond probably formed by solid-state growth under metasomatic conditions with the presence of a fluid. Solid-state growth of diamond is also supported by abundant graphite inclusions in the diamond. Sulfide inclusions in diamond often coexist with chromite and olivine or are rich in Ni content, indicating that the sulfide inclusions belong to the peridotitic suite. From the chemical compositions, most sulfide inclusions in diamond from the No. 50 kimberlite were probably trapped as monosulfide crystals, although some may have been entrapped as melts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 teacher head, 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".