Age, provenance, and regional correlation of the Athabasca Group, Saskatchewan and Alberta, constrained by igneous and detrital zircon geochronology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Detrital zircons in five sandstone samples from the Athabasca Group were dated (U-Pb) in the GSC SHRIMP II laboratory. These data, when integrated into the well established depositional framework for the Athabasca Group, provide important insights into the provenance of the succession. The Fair Point Formation yielded a substantial population of 2.61 - 2.52 Ga zircons and a second group that formed ca. 1.9 Ga, suggesting provenance from the western Rae Province, Sask Craton, and Trans-Hudson Orogen. Two samples fromtheManitou Falls Formation, Bird and Dunlop members, yielded bimodal age groups at ca. 2.58 Ga and ca. 1.85 - 1.83 Ga, suggesting provenance from the Hearne Province and Trans-Hudson Orogen, respectively. Wolverine Point Formation (Brule Member) zircons have similar provenance, but seven zircons ca. 1.77 - 1.65 Ga are enigmatic, possibly derived via long-distance fluvial transport from the Yavapai and Mazatzal orogens, over 1000 km south of Athabasca Basin. Detrital zircon ages for the Douglas Formation emulate those of the Wolverine Point Formation, supporting common provenance and reworking of underlying units, despite lacking ca. 1.77 - 1.65 Ga zircons. Zircons in intraclasts, interpreted to be locally reworked tuff layers from the Wolverine Point Formation (Brule Member), are herein dated at 1644 ± 13 Ma (U-Pb).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".