MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103872161 · doi:10.1144/1467-7873/09-238

Statistical analysis and data display at the Geochemical Prospecting Research Centre and Applied Geochemistry Research Group, Imperial College, London

2010· article· en· W2103872161 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeochemistry Exploration Environment Analysis · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProspectingGroup (periodic table)GeochemistryGeologyStatistical analysisChemistryStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The Imperial College of Science and Technology, a constituent college of the University of London in the 1960s, had the good fortune to be one of the first colleges in the United Kingdom to have access to digital computing facilities. This review traces the history of the application of computing in the Geochemical Prospecting Research Centre and its successor, the Applied Geochemistry Research Group, as computing moved from being a frontier research area to becoming a commonplace tool. The three principal areas in which it was involved comprised: the quality control, and thereby assurance, of analytical data; the production of pioneering atlases of regional geochemical variation in Northern Ireland (1973) and England and Wales (1978); and the application of methods introduced by workers in pattern-recognition and statistics to the interpretation of land-based and marine regional geochemical data.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.307
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.265 · 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