Petrographic and geochemical characteristics of the Middle−Upper Cambrian Xixiangchi dolomites in the central Sichuan Basin, southwest China: Implications for dolomite origins and dolomitization mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Middle−Upper Xixiangchi Formation of the Sichuan Basin consists of mixed carbonates and siliciclastics. The carbonates are dominated by dolomitized lime-mudstones and dolo–grainstones of shallow warm-water environments. Petrographic examination of carbonates reveals two types of dolomite: (i) fabric retentive dolomicrite (D1, micritic to near-micritic, 4–50 μm) and (ii) fabric-destructive dolomite (eu-to subhedral crystals with cloudy cores and clear rims, 50–300 μm). The mean ∑REE values of D1 (15.3 ± 6.3 ppm) and D2 (14.6 ± 7.1 ppm) and the nearly identical mean PAAS-normalized patterns that coincide at some points, suggest an origin from similar parent fluids that were not dramatically changed by water-rock interaction through basinal sedimentary rocks. The estimated Sr/Ca molar ratios of D1 (0.0043–0.0055) parent fluids and their estimated δ 18 O values imply an origin from a mixture of meteoric and seawaters, which is also consistent with the petrographic evidence. The partially coinciding normalized REE pattern of D2 with that of the earlier D1 suggests that the latter was formed at a mid-burial setting rather than deep burial, which is consistent with higher homogenization temperatures of primary two-phased fluid inclusions retained in D2 (T h = 118.1 ± 5.3 °C). Therefore, D1 is suggested to have formed (1) during a penecontemporaneous period that resulted from a slight evaporative pumping effect within a near-surface diagenetic environment, and/or (2) during post-penecontemporaneous or penecontemporaneous seepage-reflux dolomitization , induced by sea-level fluctuations, during early stages of diagenesis at near-surface conditions. D2 formed likely through the recrystallization of D1 or a continuation of reflux dolomitization of the same precursor at mid-burial rather than deep burial settings.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".