MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7014566712

The petrogenesis and mantle source of Archean ferropicrites from the Western Superior Province, Ontario, Canada

2008· dissertation· en· W7014566712 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2008
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité du Québec à MontréalNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsArcheanMantle (geology)PetrogenesisTrace elementIgneous rockIncompatible elementPartial melting
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The significance of Archean ferropicrites has been underappreciated in the past because many have been misidentified as varieties of komatiites. Ferropicrites from the Western Superior Province have distinctly higher Fe contents compared to komatiites at similar Mg contents. Enrichment in Ti, HFSE, and REE, combined with fractionated trace element profiles, indicate that these magmas are derived from a trace element enriched mantle source, which was distinct from that of komatiites. Interpolation of 5 GPa melting experiments on pyrolite and Martian mantle compositions indicates that the trace element enriched mantle source of the Western Superior Archean ferropicrites was olivine-dominated with a Mg # of ~ 85. The coexistence of ferropicrites and komatiites within the same greenstone belts indicates that the Archean mantle was compositionally heterogeneous, and the abundance of ferropicrites in the Western Superior Province suggests that ferropicrites may have been as abundant in the Archean as alkaline magmatism is today.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)→Same topicGeological and Geochemical Analysis→French-language works237,207→