Metasomatic textural changes in hypabyssal transitional kimberlites: Inferences for the texture and mineralogy of KPK
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diatremes form by explosive emplacement of many types of magma.While steep-sided diatremes filled with Kimberley-type pyroclastic kimberlite (KPK, Scott Smith et al. 2018) share similar features with other diatremes, they also contain textures without analogues in any other volcanic rocks.One of their most distinctive features is the occurrence of elliptical serpentinized melt-bearing pyroclasts (also known as pelletal lapilli) with thin magmatic mantles and clinopyroxene (cpx) rims fully embedded in a serpentine (srp)-dominated carbonate-poor matrix (Scott-Smith et al., 2018).Given the economic significance of KPKs for diamond mining, multiple models have been advanced to account for the formation of the matrixsupported textures and to explain the mineralogy of these rocks deviating from the mineralogy of the crystallized kimberlite melt.We show that elliptical serpentinized melt-bearing pyroclasts with cpx rims in hypabyssal transitional kimberlites (HKt) may form in subsolidus metasomatic reactions between the kimberlite and entrained crustal silicate xenoliths.The latter include igneous and metamorphic basement and overlying magmatic and carbonate-poor sedimentary crystalline 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".