Comparison of lower Athabasca Group stratigraphy among depositional systems, Saskatchewan and Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ca. 1.74 - 1.64 Ga lower Athabasca Group comprises four regional formations distributed among five fluvial depositional systems that prograded into the Athabasca Basin from different directions. Understanding these deposystems should aid exploration for the world's richest uranium deposits located at the basal unconformity with gneissic basement. Fair Point Formation conglomerate and coarse-grained lithic sandstone were transported westerly via the oldest, Fidler deposystem, preserved only in western Athabasca Basin. The Robert deposystem introduced Smart Formation sandstone from the southwest, onlapping the Fidler deposystem. A contemporary eastern phase of the Ahenakew deposystem introduced the Read Formation conglomerate, pebbly mudstone, and sandstone from the south and east. Finally, the broadly coeval Ahenakew, Karras, and Moosonees deposystems deposited the Manitou Falls Formation from the east, southeast, and northeast, respectively. The five Manitou Falls Formation members become thinner, finer, and indistinct toward the west where they overlap the Robert and Fidler deposystems.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".