THE ORIGIN OF RARE MINERALS IN THE KIPAWA SYENITE COMPLEL WESTERN OUEBEC*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Kipawa Syenite Complex, a concordant, folded sheet of mildly peralkaline kataphorite-aegirine syenite less than 200 m thick can be traced for more than 50 krn in the Grenville Province of westem Quebec. Several enses of biotite-aegirine nepheline syenite up to 200 long by 30 m thick occur within the complex. Along its lower margin, a region 1300 m long by 5 m thick consists of diopside and magnesiorichterite-rich schist with large amounts of eudialyte, agrellite and other rare minerals, This skam-like lens is fringed on its upper side by alkali granite. The Kipawa Syenite Complex lies entirely within granitic gneiss derived from an Archean protolitl and emplacedatl2{T x.47 Ma (Guo & Dickin 1994). The complex, emplaced iUout 12a0 Ma ago, consists mainly of deformed alkaline igneous rocks (plutonic, volcanic, or both) as shown by its geochemical signature. Marble-bearing sedimentary rocks were tlrust-imbricated with the complex during northwest-directed tectonic transport at amphibolite-facies (690'C, 9.5 kilobars) metamorphic conditions. Mechanical mixing during this process, followed by alkali metasomatism and local anatectic melting, produced skam-like rocks (contents of CaO and MgO of 12 and 10 wt.7o) containing the rare minerals. U-Pb dating of zircon fromtle rare mineral occurrence shows thatrare mineral formation occurred at 994 c 2 Ma. Alkalis, Zr, REE, Be and other elements were redistributed on scales ranging from meters to kilometers by a combination of fluid flow and anatectic melting in the presence of F-rich brines. Kqnvords: alkali syenite, metasomatism, metamorphism, amphibolite facies, mapa miring, Kipawa complex, Quebec. Sotwtc'IRE
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".