Application of composite glacial boulder geochemistry to exploration for unconformity-type uranium deposits in the Athabasca Basin, Saskatchewan, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Sampling glacially transported boulders is effective for mapping subcrop clay alteration patterns associated with deeply-buried unconformity-type uranium deposits in the Athabasca Basin of northern Saskatchewan, Canada. The technique works well because the subcrop alteration haloes show significant geochemical contrast with background, because the glacial deposits are consistently distributed and rich in boulders, and the altered boulders are typically well-represented in the boulder population. Boulder sampling is preferred over some other techniques because it is rapid and inexpensive, and the use of a lithological sampling medium provides a direct measure of subcrop clay-mineralogy, in an area where outcrop exposure is very restricted. A large composite boulder sample data set, comprising c. 20 000 samples from within the eastern part of the Athabasca Basin, has been compiled. Sampling and analytical techniques are descirbed, and results are presented at both regional and semi-regional scales. The distributions show clear correlations with both basin-scale features, such as stratigraphical variation and regional alteration patterns, and with deposit-related features, such as hydrothermal illite, dravite and chlorite alteration. Composite boulder lithogeochemistry may be equally effective for mineral exploration in other glaciated regions with restricted bedrock exposure.
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) | 0.001 | 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".