MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1485617499 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511535574

Quantitative Textural Measurements in Igneous and Metamorphic Petrology

2006· book· en· W1485617499 on OpenAlexaff
Michael D. Higgins

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2006
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIgneous rockTexture (cosmology)GeologyMetamorphic rockPetrologyMineralogyIgneous petrologyGeochemistrySeismologyArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceTectonicsVolcanism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Processes involved in the development of igneous and metamorphic rocks involve some combination of crystal growth, solution, movement and deformation, which is expressed as changes in texture (microstructure). Advances in the quantification of aspects of crystalline rock textures, such as crystal size, shape, orientation and position, have opened fresh avenues of research that extend and complement the more dominant chemical and isotopic studies. This book discusses the aspects of petrological theory necessary to understand the development of crystalline rock texture. It develops the methodological basis of quantitative textural measurements and shows how much can be achieved with limited resources. Typical applications to petrological problems are discussed for each type of measurement. This book will be of great interest to all researchers and graduate students in petrology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.173 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations368
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysisFrench-language works237,207