Fluid composition, thermal conditions, fluid-structural relationships and graphite alteration of the Phoenix uranium deposit, Athabasca Basin, Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Phoenix deposit is a high-grade unconformity-related uranium deposit located in the southeastern Athabasca Basin. Previous studies have revealed similar features to other well-known unconformity-related uranium deposits in the region, but the composition and thermal conditions of the mineralization fluids, the hydrodynamic relationship between structures and fluid pressure, and the nature of graphite degradation near mineralization zones remain unclear. Field (drill core) investigations, petrographic studies of altered and mineralized host rocks, and microthermometric and microstructural studies of fluid inclusions indicate that different structural regimes and fluid systems were developed in the pre-Athabasca stage versus the syn- to post-Athabasca, uranium mineralization stage. The pre-Athabasca stage was characterized by ductile deformation and circulation of metamorphic fluids in a relatively high P-T environment, whereas the syn- to post-Athabasca mineralization stage was characterized by brittle deformation and circulation of basinal brines in a relatively low P-T environment (with fluid inclusion homogenization temperatures of 80 to 135 °C), in which the fluid may have experienced boiling, as indicated by the coexistence of vapour-only and biphase aqueous inclusions. Preliminary fluid inclusion plane (FIP) orientation studies reveal the dominance of subvertical microfractures in crosscutting quartz veins in the basement, possibly indicating an extensional regime during certain periods of time in the synto post-Athabasca mineralization stage. Preliminary petrographic and Raman spectroscopic studies of graphite suggest that the crystal structure of the graphite tends to be more disordered toward the mineralized zones, which may potentially be used as an indicator of mineralization.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".