Subterranean Bodies: Mining the Large Lakes of North-west Canada, 1921-1960
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper examines the history of hard rock mining on the large lakes of north-west Canada (Athabasca, Great Slave and Great Bear) from 1921 to 1960. It is based on the records of the three largest mining companies, Eldorado Mining and Refining, Cominco, and Giant Mines as well as government documents, oral histories and published geological and technical reports. The paper opens by assessing the historiography of mines in relation to nature and presents an overview of the regional geology and mine operations. The analysis considers the character of 'subterranean bodies' and how they reveal the physical engagement of miners with nature. It assesses how geology in conjunction with the creation of habitable mine environments animated these bodies. The final section moves into the surface mills where ores were metaphorically and physically digested as part of a larger metabolic process. The manuscript argues that the perception of subterranean bodies masked the negative consequences of mine operations by presenting minerals as renewable resources, by presenting the large lakes as physical rather than cultural landscapes, and by separating ores from their larger environmental contexts even as miners integrated industrial operations into the large lake ecosystems.
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 | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".