MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129733268 · doi:10.1144/1467-7873/09-iags-014

3D GIS as a support for mineral discovery

2011· article· en· W2129733268 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 · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Modeling and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMira Geoscience (Canada)Ministère des Ressources naturelles et des Forêts (Québec)Geological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData scienceMineralGeographyComputer scienceBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Exploration for deep-seated mineral deposits in mature mining camps requires integration of large and heterogeneous spatial data-sets. Traditionally, geological, geochemical, and geophysical observations are acquired, processed and analysed independently within separate spatial contexts or more commonly, for geochemical data, in non-spatial feature space. Although methodological developments are still in progress, 3D GIS (geographic information system) technologies already provide powerful tools that can be used to integrate such heterogeneous data-sets to visualize, compare, and characterize geological relationships in a more supportive interpretive environment. Importantly, this technology provides better opportunities to embed all these properties in a more robust geometric framework in which structural history and palaeogeographic setting can be taken into account. We present 3D GIS applications that aid in interpreting relationship patterns amongst faults, folds and geochemical trends. Examples from the Noranda mining region, a classic VMS mining camp, demonstrate the applicability of 3D GIS to support the discovery of new mineral resources at depth.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.494
Threshold uncertainty score0.982

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.172 · 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