Geochemistry of gold from Ontario gold deposits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gold is one of the most crucial metals in human history, and still, few investigations have directly studied gold composition to understand gold systems. Ontario (Canada) provides a natural example of gold systems because of the abundance and distribution of world class gold deposits. The present study constrains the geochemical signature of free gold using SEM-EDS, EPMA and LA-ICP-MS to characterize 242 samples from 71 gold deposits and occurrences. Generally, Ag, Cu, and Hg occur over 100 ppm, with Sb, Pd, Cd, and Bi typically as trace elements between 0.001 and 100 ppm. The geochemical signature of gold varies at the craton scale but is consistent at the camp scale. These spatially distinct trace element signatures are independent of local host rock and deposit types, which have implications regarding the controls on ore-forming mechanisms and reflect district-scale variations in the primary and secondary composition of gold. This elemental signature has important practical applications for industry; for example, in using elemental vectors that reflect local gold composition and/or in metallurgical processing.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".