The structural setting and evolution of the Upper Beaver gold–copper deposit, Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ca. 2680 Ma Upper Beaver deposit is an Archean intrusion-related gold–copper deposit located in the Abitibi greenstone belt, Ontario. The deposit is associated with the Upper Beaver Intrusive Complex, which was emplaced in the hanging wall of an extensional listric fault rooted in metavolcanic rocks of the ca. 2704–2695 Ma Blake River assemblage. The fault formed during the development of an overlying basin of fluvial metasedimentary and alkalic metavolcanic rocks of the ca. 2679–2669 Ma Timiskaming assemblage. The Upper Beaver deposit was subsequently rotated to its current position during the formation of a post-Timiskaming fold, the Spectacle Lakes Anticline, associated with the development of the Larder Lake–Cadillac deformation zone, located 7 km south of the deposit. The Upper Beaver deposit is overprinted by the axial planar cleavage of the anticline but is less deformed than other gold deposits located along the deformation zone. Alteration and other pre-existing planar anisotropies enhanced strain partitioning and the development of folds and fabrics in strained mineralized zones of the deposit. Steeply dipping, sericite-altered mineralized zones developed a continuous foliation surrounding boudinaged and recrystallized quartz–calcite–anhydrite veins, whereas strong, shallowly dipping, stratiform, and skarnoid mineralized zones developed a wavy disjunctive cleavage and deformed mainly by folding. The mineralized zones acted as pre-existing anisotropies during deformation and their orientation and composition were key factors in the development of structures at the Upper Beaver deposit, which can be used as a guide for interpreting the development of structures in similar but more complexly deformed deposits along major deformation zones.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".