© World Nuclear Association 2001 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For the past several years, the uranium supply sector has, through a series of political, financial, and technical events, been dominated by secondary sources of uranium. The very low uranium prices this dominance has produced, along with a flat outlook for uranium requirements and the slower development path of new uranium mines during the market low, has displaced contemplation of the exploration and discovery of new uranium resources to the almost-geologically long term future. Yet for several reasons, this front-end segment of the uranium fuel cycle needs to be understood and considered in any long-term analysis of the uranium market. A brief analysis of the discovery and production history of the Athabasca basin in northern Saskatchewan provides a useful illustration of how market dynamics influence uranium exploration investment, and how exploration discoveries in turn influence uranium markets. As in any such analysis, past behaviour may provide some insight into future patterns, which have considerable relevance today as nuclear power is once more coming under positive consideration as a source of reliable and clean energy. Athabasca Basin Discovery History The chronology of exploration discoveries in the Athabasca basin covers a period from about 1968, with the first major uranium discovery at Rabbit Lake just outside the basin, to the present. In detail, an early period of exploration discoveries (Figure 1), culminating in the discovery of the Key Lake deposit in 1975, was based largely on followup of uranium mineralization found by traditional prospecting on the land surface. These deposits, by 1977 called unconformity uranium deposits to denote their location at the contact between basement rocks and sandstone, were located close to the land surface. This allowed either direct observation of mineralized boulders, or detection of radiometric anomalies caused by uranium mineralization. This initial stage of “easy discoveries ” can be grouped as Phase I of the exploration history. A longer second phase of exploration discoveries, including the largest known deposits,
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.758 | 0.800 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".