MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138312351 · doi:10.1144/1467-7873/07-135

Rutile compositions at the Big Bell Au deposit as a guide for exploration

2007· article· en· W2138312351 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeochemistry Exploration Environment Analysis · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRutileGeochemistryGeologyBusinessPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The compositions of 277 grains of rutile from 24 samples from the Big Bell Au deposit and nearby smaller deposits, in the Murchison Province of Western Australia, reveal that rutiles associated with ore at Big Bell, and for up to 200 m into the footwall rocks, are V+Fe+W+Sb-rich – a characteristic of rutile that has previously only ever been documented at the Hemlo Au deposit in Canada. Rutile from the nearby Fender and Indicator deposits share this Big Bell-type signature, but that from North Fender contains Nb±Ta, with W and Fe, suggesting formation from a quite different fluid and at a different period. The preservation of the different types of rutile in regolith samples in the Big Bell region indicates that it is possible to discriminate between the V+Fe+W+Sb-rich and Fe+Nb±Ta-rich alteration in rutile using regolith samples.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score0.891

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.237
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