Geochemistry and oxygen isotopic composition of \nthe Canton Saint-Onge wollastonite deposit, \ncentral Grenville Province, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The geology and geochemistry of the Canton Saint-Onge wollastonite deposit indicate that it is a skarn formed by silica metasomatism of dolomite-rich rocks. Oxygen isotopic compositions of the skarn rocks and the nearby plutons show that the fluids responsible for the metasomatism were not meteoric, but were probably associated with the Du Bras granitic pluton. However, the granite is not in contact with the wollastonite rocks at the present level of exposure, hence the fluids must have been released at greater depths. Wollastonite-rich parts of the skarn rocks are isotopically lighter than diopside-rich rocks, suggesting that wollastonite formed in regions of higher fluid flux. \n \n \nLa géologie et la géochimie du dépôt de wollastonite du canton Saint-Onge indiquent qu'il s'agit d'un skarn formé par le métasomatisme de la silice de roches riches en dolomie. Les compositions isotopiques de l'oxygène des roches skarnifiées et des plutons avoisinants montrent que les fluides responsables du métasomatisme n'étaient pas d'origine météorique mais qu'ils étaient plutôt associés au pluton granitique de Du Bras. Toutefois, le granite n'est pas en contact avec les roches à wollastonite au présent niveau d'affleurement; les fluides auraient donc été relâchés à de plus grandes profondeurs. Les parties riches en wollastonite des roches du skarn sont isotopiquement plus légères que les roches à diopside, indiquant que la wollastonite s'est formée dans des régions à très grand écoulement.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".