MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120922436 · doi:10.1071/aseg2015ab306

Supervised Neural Network Targeting and Classification Analysis of Airborne EM, Magnetic and Gamma-ray Spectrometry Data for Mineral Exploration

2015· article· en· W2120922436 on OpenAlexaff
Karl Kwan, Stephen Reford, Djiba Maïga Abdoul-Wahab, Douglas Pitcher, Nasreddine Bournas, Alexander Prikhodko, Geoffrey Plastow, Jean M. Legault

Bibliographic record

VenueASEG Extended Abstracts · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Transportation of OntarioPetro Geotech (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkMineral explorationData miningComputer scienceData integrationData processingRemote sensingMachine learningGeophysicsGeologyDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The amount of multi-disciplinary (geology, geophysics, remote sensing, etc.) and multi-parameter geophysical (potential field, EM, gamma-ray spectrometry, etc.) data available for mineral exploration is ever increasing. The integration and analysis of the data require effective and efficient search engines or data mining tools. The search engines will take the signatures of known mineral deposits or interpreted mineralization targets (“key words”), search the data space and return potential new targets (“matches”), thus providing locations to the decision makers for follow-up. Two supervised feedforward multilayer neural network (NN) search algorithms will be presented and analysed. The utility of the NN search tools will be demonstrated with the integration and analysis of airborne electromagnetic (EM), magnetic and radiometric data for mineralization targets in Iullemmeden Basin, Niger.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations14
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASEG Extended AbstractsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207