Athabasca Regional Geophysical Study - Implications for Geothermal Development in Northeastern Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Athabasca region in northeastern Alberta hosts many producing oil sand projects. These projects require large amounts of thermal energy to produce most of which is currently provided by burning natural gas; and this increases the greenhouse gas footprint to producing such hydrocarbons. One possible solution is to instead use geothermal heat directly with hot fluids produced using Engineered Geothermal Systems (EGS). Geothermal exploration always starts with broad geological structure reconnaissance of the area. Seismic reflection profiles, High Resolution Aeromagnetic (HRAM) data, and a large amount of available well-logs are used in an integrated approach to outlining sedimentary basin, mapping geological formation tops, locating fault zones and other structural lineaments, finding true depth of metamorphic basement, and finally building a detailed geological model of the region. The 3D geological model is constructed using these available data that reveals some detail about the gross structure of the region. This model shows that the Precambrian basement surface is a smoothly undulating surface that could be consistent with minor faulting. The topography of this surface affects the structure of overlying sedimentary formations.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".