Surface-water, ground-water, and sediment geochemistry of epizonal and shear-hosted mineral deposits in the Tintina Gold Province--arsenic and antimony distribution and mobility: Chapter G in <i>Recent U.S. Geological Survey studies in the Tintina Gold Province, Alaska, United States, and Yukon, Canada--results of a 5-year project</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epigenetic mineral deposits in the Tintina Gold Province are generally characterized by high concentrations of arsenic and antimony in their mineral assemblage.A total of 347 samples (ground water, surface water, and stream sediment) were collected to investigate the distribution and mobility of arsenic and antimony in the environment near known mineral deposits.Samples were collected from east to west at Keno Hill and Brewery Creek, Yukon, Canada; and Cleary Hill, True North, Scrafford Mine, Fairbanks, Ryan Lode, Stampede Creek, Slate Creek, and Donlin Creek, all in Alaska.Surface-and ground-water samples are all slightly acidic to near-neutral in pH (5-8), have a wide range in specific conductance (surface water 17-2,980 microsiemens per centimeter and ground water 170-2,940 microsiemens per centimeter), and show elevated dissolved arsenic and antimony concentrations (arsenic in surface water is less than 1 to 380 micrograms per liter and in ground water is less than 1 micrograms per liter to 1.5 milligrams per liter; antimony in surface water is less than 2 to 660 micrograms per liter and in ground water is less than 2 to 60 micrograms per liter).Stream sediments downstream from these deposits have high concentrations of arsenic and antimony (arsenic median is 1,670 parts per million, maximum is 10,000 parts per million; antimony median is 192 parts per million, maximum is 7,200 parts per million).The mobility of arsenic and antimony is controlled by the local redox environment
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".