Reactivated fault systems and their effects on outcrop patterns of thin-skinned early thrust imbrications in the Kiggavik uranium camp, Nunavut
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reactivated ENE-WSW-trending dextral fault arrays in the northeast Thelon Basin region are exemplified by the dextral, north-down, oblique-slip Thelon and Judge Sissons faults. We compiled and interpreted a variety of geoscience data, including lineaments, detailed outcrop and samples to produce new maps that incorporate past observations by Industry and academic studies. The reactivated fault arrays discordantly transect the main basement foliation and comprise zones of sub-parallel brittle and ductile fractures detailed here and interpreted as products of Riedel shear systems that were successively reactivated by multiple tectonic events with varying principle stresses. The key basement assemblage dismembered by the fault systems is a thrust- and fold-imbricated complex (hereafter "imbricate complex") com-prising 2.6 Ga epiclastic rocks and rhyolite of the Pukiq Lake formation (Snow Island Suite), and Paleoproterozoic quartzite of the Ketyet River group. The imbricate complex structurally overlies and may include some metagreywacke of the Neoarchean Pipedream assemblage, Woodburn Lake group, from west of Judge Sissons Lake to southeastern Schultz Lake, trending through the Andrew Lake, End, Granite Grid, Bong and Kiggavik uranium deposits. It lies between two inferred low-angle structures: Granite Thrust to the W and the Pukiq discontinuity to the SE. These are in turn offset by the Thelon and Judge Sissons faults. Imbrication took place during DP1. The much younger Thelon Basin developed trans-extensionally during DP6-DP7 (Table 1). Intersections between reactivated brittle-ductile fractures and the imbricate complex likely created conduits and barriers to hydrothermal fluid flow forming basement-hosted uranium deposits during and/or after filling of Thelon Basin, similar to those 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".