Geophysical methods for kimberlite exploration in northern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1991, the discovery of diamondiferous kimberlite in Canada's Northwest Territories (NWT) precipitated the largest mineral staking rush in North America and sparked a remarkable exploration effort which extended across northern Canada. Thirteen years later, two diamond mines with estimated annual productions of $1 billion (Can) are in operation, a third is in permitting, and several other projects are approaching development. Ekati mine, operated by BHP Billiton since 1998, produced 4.8 million carats from 4.2 million tons of ore in 2003 while the nearby Diavik diamond mine yielded 2.7 million carats from 1.0 million tons of ore during the same period. When Diavik has achieved full production in 2004, Canada will account for 15% of global diamond output by value. The exploration programs which created this new industry relied heavily upon the efficient application of complementary geophysical techniques. This paper overviews geophysical exploration methods currently used in diamond exploration in northern Canada.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".