MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034888775 · doi:10.1071/aseg2015ab289

Predictive Modelling for Iron Ore Exploration Targeting: Case Study: 57 Bt Xaudum Iron Ore Exploration Target (Botswana).

2015· article· en· W2034888775 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Dr Iuma Martinez, Alistair Jeffcoate, Gaetan Fuss, Dr Mike de Wit, McDonald Kahari, Omphile Ntshasang

Bibliographic record

VenueASEG Extended Abstracts · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMineral Processing and Grinding
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFirst Quantum Minerals
KeywordsIron oreGeologyDrillDrillingInversion (geology)Mining engineeringDrill holeBanded iron formationMineral explorationRobustness (evolution)MagnetiteGeochemistryGeomorphologyStructural basinEngineeringPaleontologySedimentary rockGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The principal objective of the research was to determine an exploration target estimate for the Xaudom Iron Ore project. Geophysical data inversion modelling was carried out and the results calibrated against local drill hole interpretation-based geological models. The results compared favourably and enabled a number of correction factors to be established. Subsequent drilling and geological modelling have yielded NI 43-101 compliant resources that are similar to the initial inversion based modelling estimates within optimised pit shells, showing the robustness of the Exploration Target technique. The approach discussed here may be useful for delineating exploration targets for other magnetite-rich iron mineralized areas faced with complex deformational histories.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASEG Extended AbstractsSame topicMineral Processing and GrindingFrench-language works237,207