MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095332405 · doi:10.1071/eg02028

Mineral potential evaluation based on airborne geophysical data

2002· article· en· W2095332405 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueExploration Geophysics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyMineral explorationMineral resource classificationRadiometric datingThoriumGeophysical surveyRemote sensingUraniumGeophysicsGeochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A prediction model, based on the differences between the distribution functions of geophysical survey data from mineralised and non-mineralised areas, has been developed to identify exploration targets. Exploration for mineral resources is conducted in a step-by-step approach, and the proposed prediction model is applicable to each of these steps. Empirical probabilities of discovering new deposits are estimated by a cross-validation technique. The cross-validation technique is central to the proposed methodology.The first study area, located in north-east Guinea, West Africa, covers 46000 km2. Magnetic and radiometric data from a 1 km line spacing airborne survey were used to create a mineral prediction map for lateritic-type gold deposits. This can be considered a reconnaissance study to identify further exploration areas likely to contain undiscovered deposits. These areas should be small enough to carry out further geologic study. From the prediction model, we have identified target areas, covering approximately 2300 km2 or 5% of the study area. We expect that the target areas contain 55% of all undiscovered lateritic gold deposits in the study region. The best prediction results are obtained when the total magnetic field, potassium abundance and uranium to thorium ratio data are used.The second example is from the Bathurst Mining Camp in New Brunswick, eastern Canada. Geophysical data are from a high-resolution helicopter-borne magnetic, electromagnetic and radiometric survey flown during the summer of 1995. This prediction study can be considered as a second step after a first reconnaissance study. The area covers approximately 4100 km2 and many volcanogenic massive sulphide (VMS) deposits are found in this region. The best prediction results are obtained using magnetic and electromagnetic data only, without radiometric data. The target areas delineated in the prediction map cover 41 km2 or 1% of the study area. From the cross-validation analysis these target areas are expected to contain 40% of all undiscovered VMS deposits in the Bathurst Mining Camp.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.742

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.083
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.183 · 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