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 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

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.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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