MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6889879081 · doi:10.26022/ieda/112086

'Roll-front' mass transfer of carbonate cations in Carlin-type gold deposits: insights from UV-fluorescent calcite veins

2021· dataset· en· W6889879081 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueEarthChem Library · 2021
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalciteCarbonateVeinHydrothermal circulationCarbonate rockSodium carbonate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dataset contains clumped isotope data for ore-stage carbonate veins from the Nadeleen trend Carlin-type gold deposits, Yukon Canada, which likely form through replacement of pre-ore carbonate veins. The five analyzed samples include: Sample CI-6 from a grey, bedding-parallel calcite vein with fibrous syntaxial growth and cone-in-cone textures that give it a ‘beefy calcite’ texture, collected from the Lower Carbonate Member in drillcore through the Conrad deposit. CI-7 is from a white, bedding-normal, UV-flourescent calcite vein with blocky crystals, which cuts the vein from which sample CI-6 was obtained. Sample CI-8 is a UV-fluorescent calcite vein with realgar along its edge. It comprised elongate syntaxial crystals, some of which contain sub-grains. The vein cuts through decarbonatized wall-rock with abundant realgar. CI-9 is a sample of least-altered wall-rock from the Upper Carbonate member of the Nadaleen Formation. This limestone is dominantly calcite with minor quartz, and there is no indication that this unit has interacted with any hydrothermal fluids. CI-10 is a white, non-UV-fluorescent, bedding-normal vein comprising blocky calcite crystals that was sampled adjacent to CI-9.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.011

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarthChem LibraryFrench-language works237,207