MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Detection of alteration at the Millennium uranium deposit in the Athabasca Basin: a comparison of data from two airborne electromagnetic systems with ground resistivity data

2010· article· en· W1899127567 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Prospecting · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsCameco (Canada)Laurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyUranium oreUraniumProterozoicBasementGeochemistryElectrical resistivity and conductivityStructural basinGeothermal gradientRadiometric datingGneissMineralogyUnconformityPetrologySedimentary rockGeomorphologyGeophysicsPaleontologyMetamorphic rockTectonicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The Millennium uranium deposit is located within the Athabasca Basin of northern Saskatchewan. The basement rocks, comprised primarily of paleo‐Proterozoic gneisses, are electrically resistive. However, the deposit is associated with highly conductive graphitic metasediments that are intercalated with the gneisses. An unconformity separates the basement rocks from the overlying, horizontally stratified, Proterozoic sandstones of the Athabasca Group (which are also highly resistive). The strike extents of the graphitic metasedimenary packages are extensive and therefore electromagnetic (EM) survey techniques are successful at identifying these zones but do not identify the specific locations where they are enriched in uranium. Through drilling it has been noted that hydrothermal processes associated with mineralization has altered the rocks in the vicinity of the deposits, which should in theory result in a resistivity low. A significant resistivity low has been mapped coincident with the Millennium deposit using ground resistivity survey techniques. However, a comparison of the airborne EM and ground resistivity results reveals that the two data sets have imaged different features. The resistive‐limit (on‐time) windows of the MEGATEM data show conductive features corresponding to lakes located to the west and south of the deposit. The late‐time windows show a feature to the east of the deposit, interpreted as being associated with the east‐dipping graphitic basement conductors (similar to that observed in historical ground EM data collected in this area). The early‐time TEMPEST windows (delay times less than 0.2 ms) show a broad resistivity low located at approximately the same location as where the alteration has been identified through drilling. Modelling the data is not easy but a response that decays prior to 0.3 ms is consistent with 500 Ωm material in the sandstone, a resistivity value close to the lower limit with respect to the hydrothermally altered Athabasca group sediments in this area. The MEGATEM system does not see a conductive zone over the alteration as clearly but the high signal‐to‐noise ratio in the late‐time MEGATEM data means that the conductive material at a greater depth is more coherently imaged.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.439
Threshold uncertainty score0.946

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.244 · 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