Mining Diamonds in the Canadian Arctic: The Diavik Mine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Diavik mine, located in the Archean-age Slave geologic province in northern Canada, is one of the world's preeminent sources of gem diamonds.Since mining operations began in 2003, it has produced over 100 million carats of diamonds.This article will review the discovery, development, and operation of the mine, which is situated in a remote subarctic setting in the Northwest Territories.Four kimberlite pipes occur in close proximity-three are being exploited, while the fourth will be brought into production in 2018.Diavik is now expected to operate through 2024; upon closure, the equipment, buildings, and infrastructure will be removed and the land returned as closely as possible to its original condition.C anada is the world's fourth-largest diamond producer, with most of that output coming from one area near Lac de Gras in the Northwest Territories.The discovery of kimberlite pipes there in the early 1990s led to the development of several major mines.Diamond-bearing kimberlite deposits that can be mined economically are noteworthy, since only about 50 such occurrences have been found worldwide since the 1870s, mainly in Australia, Angola, Canada, Russia, and South Africa (Janse, 2007).As of mid-2016, Canada has three active mines: Ekati and Diavik (figure 1), located about 30 km from each other in the Northwest Territories (figure 2), and the Victor mine in northern Ontario.Snap Lake, recently placed in a care and maintenance status, lies within 80 km of Ekati and Diavik.Two other Canadian mines are under development: Gahcho Kué in the Northwest Territories and Renard in Quebec.Figures from the Kimberley Process (www.kimberleyprocess.com/en/canada)show that Canada produced 11.6 million carats of rough diamonds in 2015, valued at US$1.675 billion.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".