Petrological and geochemical comparison of the Eisler and Laonil Lake Intrusive Complexes, Glennie Domain, northern Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Seabee Gold Operation, located in northern Saskatchewan, ~125 km northeast of La Ronge, has been in continuous operation since 1991. The host rocks for the gold mineralization are the volcanic and plutonic rocks of the Pine Lake greenstone belt, which represent a volcanic island arc terrane that was accreted onto proto-North America and was metamorphosed during the Trans-Hudson orogen ca. 1.8 billion years ago. An older volcanic package (“A”) is separated from a younger volcanic package (“B”) by a regional unconformity. The Laonil Lake Intrusive Complex, which hosts the Seabee gold deposit, and the Eisler Intrusive Complex are thought to be part of Assemblage A, based on an imprecise age determination of the Laonil Lake Intrusive Complex and by initial comparative observation of the Laonil and Eisler Intrusive Complexes. This study aims to better understand the age and tectonic setting of the Laonil Lake Intrusive Complex and its relationship to the nearby Eisler Intrusive Complex—which might represent the same igneous event, and therefore be of interest as an exploration target. Methods to test their correlation include whole rock geochemistry, petrography, Sm-Nd isotopes, and U-Pb geochronology. Preliminary modal mineralogy of samples was used to derive rock names (using pre-metamorphic names); the Laonil Lake Intrusive Complex samples are quartz gabbro and tonalite, whereas the Eisler Intrusive Complex samples are tonalite, quartz gabbro, gabbro, and pyroxenite. The preliminary age determinations of the Laonil Lake and Eisler Intrusive Complexes are ca. 1877 Ma and 1884 Ma, respectively. The geochemical signatures of all samples suggest derivation in a volcanic arc setting. The samples exhibit a slight LREE enrichment and epsilon Nd values (+3.61 to +4.65) that suggest a depleted mantle source for the magmas. The ages of Laonil Lake and Eisler Intrusive Complexes suggest that both are part of Assemblage A. The results of this research will provide constraints on the correlation between the Pine Lake greenstone belt and other volcanic belts in the Trans-Hudson orogeny.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".