From tree-tops to massive sulphide in the Mabel Lake area, British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glacial deposits, dense vegetation and rugged terrain pose challenges to conventional mineral exploration in the Mabel Lake area of southern British Columbia, where metamorphosed schists, quartzites and calcareous rocks of the Monashee sequence are known to host significant Pb-Zn deposits such as Kingfisher and Ruddock Creek. In 2006, the Geological Survey of Canada conducted a reconnaissance tree-top sampling programme to provide a biogeochemical dataset for c . 700 km 2 of this region. Douglas-fir tree-top samples from 562 sample stations were collected from a helicopter, and analysis of the tissues indicated several Tl and Cd anomalies. Detailed follow-up sampling east of Mabel Lake using western hemlock bark confirmed a Tl anomaly extending c . 600 × 600 m. Data from these surveys were published but received little attention for several years until the area surrounding the main Tl anomaly was staked and detailed exploration commenced. Ah soil horizon sampling within the Tl anomaly identified multi-element anomalies including high concentrations of Mo and Zn. Indicator minerals from a few stream sediments included gahnite and goldmanite providing further evidence for the presence of base metal mineralization. Follow-up work that involved 391 m of excavations along 3 parallel trenches revealed a gossan-rich zone, 10–35 m wide and >50 m long with best concentrations of 8.98% Zn (over 3 m); 580 ppb Re; 1339 ppm Mo, and anomalous concentrations of Cd, Cu, Bi, Ni, Pb, Sn, Tl, V and W. Subsequently, a HeliTEM® electromagnetic survey was flown over c . 12 km 2 of the contiguous claims and a small drilling programme has intersected Zn-rich massive sulphide. This grassroots study demonstrates the evolution of an exploration programme that started with a chronological order of: (a) reconnaissance biogeochemical survey; (b) detailed biogeochemistry; (c) Ah soil horizon geochemistry; (d) indicator mineral stream sediment survey; (e) trenching; (f) airborne geophysics; and (g) drilling that has identified significant base metal mineralization.
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 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".