MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982861036 · doi:10.1190/1.3427636

Mapping of apparent magnetic susceptibility and the identification of fractures: A case study from the Eye-Dashwa Lakes pluton, Atikokan, Ontario

2010· article· en· W1982861036 on OpenAlexaffabout
Madeline D. Lee, William A. Morris, Hernan Ugalde

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetic susceptibilityPlutonOutcropGeologyOverburdenMineralogyGeomorphologyPaleontologyTectonicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In situ magnetic-susceptibility measurements are only possible on outcrops, which are often limited by overburden and water bodies. An alternative approach is to derive an apparent susceptibility map from total-magnetic-intensity (TMI) surveys, which was done in this study for the Eye-Dashwa Lakes pluton near Atikokan, Ontario. Susceptibility logs of cores directly link alteration to systematic changes in the amount and composition of magnetic minerals. The surficial distribution of alteration zones was originally estimated from a limited number of in situ magnetic-susceptibility measurements. Here, through forward modeling of the TMI data set, susceptibility data are used to validate the apparent susceptibility data set. The modeling accounts for the bathymetric surface of all lakes that cover the area. A two-step process of bulk and local-scale modeling was used to estimate apparent susceptibility patterns. Bulk magnetic susceptibility is used as an indicator of overall alteration content, and local-scale apparent magnetic-susceptibility values are computed using a forward-modeling routine. The new apparent magnetic data set indicates northwest and northeast linears, which are the same as those seen in previous studies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.469
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations30
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicGeomagnetism and Paleomagnetism StudiesFrench-language works237,207