MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145154554 · doi:10.1190/geo2012-0135.1

3D edge detection seismic attributes used to map potential conduits for water and methane in deep gold mines in the Witwatersrand basin, South Africa

2012· article· en· W2145154554 on OpenAlexaff
M. Manzi, Raymond Durrheim, Kim A.A. Hein, Nick King

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques
Canadian institutionsBarrick Gold (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyMethaneDiatremeElectrical conduitAquiferMining engineeringCoal miningReefRhombusGroundwaterGeochemistryCoalGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Inrushes of ground water and the ignition of flammable gases pose risks to workers in deep South African gold mines. Large volumes of water may be stored in solution cavities in dolomitic rocks that overlie the Black Reef (BLR) Formation, while there are several possible sources for methane, namely, coal seams, kerogen found in some gold ore bodies, or methane introduced by igneous intrusions. Potential conduits that may transport water and methane to underground workings were mapped using 3D reflection seismic data. Edge detection attributes successfully identified many faults, some with displacements as small as 10 m. Faults that displace the Ventersdorp Contact Reef (VCR) and the BLR horizons were of special interest, as known occurrences of fissure water and methane in underground workings show a good correlation with faults that were imaged on the VCR and BLR horizons. Because there are uncertainties in determining the linkage of faults with aquifers and methane sources, it is considered prudent to assume that all structures that displace the VCR and BLR horizons are potential conduits.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations73
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicSeismic Imaging and Inversion TechniquesFrench-language works237,207