Survey of closed and abandoned mines in British Columbia for acid rock drainage I : regional perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1991, Environment Canada and the British Columbia (B.C.) Acid Mine Drainage Task Force initiated a project with the goal of compiling information for closed and abandoned mine sites throughout British Columbia. The ultimate objective of the study is to assess the current and potential impacts caused by acid rock drainage (ARD) on surface water quality throughout the province. In addition, in the Fraser River basin, non-mining sources of ARD (such as natural weathering, railway and road cuts and municipal developments) are also being considered. This paper presents the results of the evaluation with respect to the regional distribution of closed and abandoned mines throughout B.C. and the regional ARD potential based on a derived ranking scheme. Three regions of the province were identified as having a high potential for ARD. There are several acid-producing mines in the Smithers and Stewart regions and Vancouver Island, and other mines are in geological settings which could allow ARD to be produced. The Kootenay region has seen extensive historical mining activity, but there is a lack of environmental data for individual mines. The presence of limestone and calcite in the mine sequences limits ARD potential in the Kootenays, although this mineral is not always closely associated with ore minerals. In general, the Fraser River basin has less historical mining activity than the rest of B.C, partly as a result of glacial drift cover. The potential for ARD in the basin also appears lower than elsewhere due to the common occurrence of calcite-bearing volcanic rocks.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".