MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114244687 · doi:10.1139/e01-077

Comparison of diagenetic fluids in the Proterozoic Thelon and Athabasca Basins, Canada: implications for protracted fluid histories in stable intracratonic basins

2002· article· en· W2114244687 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Christophe Renac, Kurt Kyser, K DUROCHER, G Dreaver, Terrence K. O'Connor

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsCameco (Canada)Queen's University
FundersCameco
KeywordsDiagenesisGeologyIlliteGeochemistryStructural basinCementation (geology)QuartzUranium oreMineralogyPaleontologyUraniumClay mineralsCement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Paleoproterozoic Thelon Basin, located on the border between Nunavut and the Northwest Territories of Canada, is a contemporaneous analog of the uranium-rich Paleoproterozoic Athabasca Basin in Canada. Early diagenesis resulted in precipitation of extensive hematite on the surfaces of detrital quartz grains throughout the Thelon Formation and minor hydroxy-phosphate in veins locally. Continued diagenesis then resulted in syntaxial quartz cementation of detrital quartz at 130°C from fluids having ca. 17 wt.% equivalent NaCl, similar to the Athabasca Basin. Cementation of this type is most pronounced in fine-grained sequences in the Thelon Basin. A period of extensive desilicification during continued burial was followed by formation, at ca. 200°C, of peak-diagenetic illite having Ar–Ar ages of ca. 1400–1690 Ma in the Thelon Formation. This illite was associated with fluids with δ18O and δD values of ca. 6‰ and –50‰, respectively, similar to those during peak diagenesis of the Athabasca Basin. Although the timing, salinity, and isotopic composition of the peak-diagenetic fluids in the Thelon and Athabasca Basins are similar, the peak-diagenetic mineral assemblage in the Athabasca Formation is dickite and illite, with minor dravite and goyasite rather than simply illite. Consequently, the fluids at peak diagenesis, which in the Athabasca Basin are synchronous with formation of world-class unconformity-type uranium deposits, had different compositions in each basin. Post-peak diagenesis in the Thelon Basin was quite distinct from that in the Athabasca Basin in that illite was replaced in the central portion of the basin by K-feldspar and then sudoite, which crystallized from saline brines at ca. 1000 Ma and 100°C. Evidence for later infiltration of these brines is absent in the Athabasca Basin, although uranium mobilization at ca. 900 Ma from fluids having the same characteristics as those at peak diagenesis was pronounced in the Athabasca Basin. Recent incursion of meteoric waters along reactivated structures into the Athabasca Basin has variably affected hydrous and uraniferous minerals, but evidence for this is lacking in the Thelon Basin. The Thelon Basin reflects less intensive fluid–rock interaction in its early history than that recorded in the basal units of the Athabasca Basin.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations65
Published2002
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicGeological and Geochemical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207