Trace Element Characteristics of Pyrite and Arsenopyrite from the Golden Ridge Gold Deposit, New Brunswick, Canada: Implications for Ore Genesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Golden Ridge gold deposit is located in southwestern New Brunswick, in the Canadian Appalachians. Gold mineralization is consistently associated with acicular arsenopyrite, and to a lesser degree with pyrite, disseminated in host rocks, sulphide veinlets, quartz-carbonate veins, and the breccia matrix. According to petrographic-based textural differences, four types of pyrite and two types of arsenopyrite are recognized with associated assemblages. Based on SEM-BSE imaging and LA-ICP-MS spot analyses of the different types of pyrites and arsenopyrites, “invisible gold” (solid solution in the crystal lattice of pyrite and arsenopyrite or <100 nm nanoparticles) and micrometer-size inclusions were identified as the main forms of Au. Four syn-gold mineralization pulses of fluid are suggested. The initial hydrothermal fluid, which generated low-grade pyrite (Py-I) enriched in Sb, Pb, Cu, Co, Ni, and Bi, was followed by a second pulse of fluid enriched in arsenic and gold, generating coprecipitated Py-II and Asp-I. The third and fourth pulses were enriched in both arsenic and gold and precipitated Py-III, then coprecipitated Py-IV and Asp-II, which constitute the most important Au depositional episodes. The repeated occurrence of growth zones with Au enrichment in the arsenian pyrites (Py-II, Py-III, and Py-IV) indicate surface growth during metal deposition and disequilibrium crystallization processes.
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".