Formation of magnetite-(apatite) systems by crystallizing ultrabasic iron-rich melts and slag separation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Magnetite-(apatite) ore deposits are interpreted as being formed by the crystallization of iron-rich ultrabasic melts, dominantly generated by the interaction of silicate melts with oxidized P-F-SO 4 -bearing sedimentary rocks. This hypothesis is supported by geologic evidence, experimental studies, numerical modeling, stable and radiogenic isotope geochemistry, mineralogy, and melt- and mineral-inclusion data. Assimilation of crustal rocks during ascent promotes separation from a silicate magma of Fe-rich, Si-Al-poor melts with low solidus temperatures and viscosities, allowing coalescence, migration, and emplacement at deep to subaerial crustal environments. When the iron-rich melt attains neutral buoyancy, fractional crystallization leads to melt immiscibility similar to that observed in industrial blast furnaces, which promotes separation of massive magnetite ore overlain by different types of “slag” containing actinolite or diopside ± phosphates ± magnetite ± feldspar ± anhydrite ± scapolite, commonly enriched in high field strength elements. The mineralogy and morphology of this iron-depleted cap strongly depend on the depth of emplacement and composition of the iron-rich magma. Most of these systems exhibit high oxygen fugacity, which inhibits the precipitation of significant sulfide mineralization. The initially high f O 2 of these systems also promotes the formation of low-Ti (< 1 wt%) magnetite: Ti acts as an incompatible component and is enriched in the iron-poor caps and in the hydrothermal aureole. High fluid-phase pressures produced during massive crystallization of magnetite from the melt further facilitate the exsolution of magmatic-hydrothermal fluids responsible for the formation of aureoles of alkali-calcic-iron alteration with hydrothermal replacement-style iron mineralization. On the whole, these systems are dramatically different from the magmatic-hydrothermal systems related to intermediate to felsic igneous rocks; they are more akin to carbonatite and other ultramafic rocks.
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".