MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157552880 · doi:10.1144/1467-7873/08-174

From geochemical prospecting to international geochemical mapping: a historical overview

2008· article· en· W2157552880 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 · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProspectingGeologyGeochemistryEarth scienceArchaeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides a history of the development of regional geochemical mapping. Modern geochemistry was born in the Soviet Union in the 1930s, and the basic methodologies for regional mapping had been developed by the late 1960s, with important extensions being made in the 1980s. The paper records the development of regional geochemical surveys, or mapping, in the context of spatial scale and transition from a mineral exploration and resource assessment tool to an environmental mapping exercise supporting multi-disciplinary research. Attention is drawn to the role of the International Geological Correlation Program's Projects 259 and 360, and the continuing role of the International Union of Geological Sciences, in providing an international focus and dimension to global geochemical mapping. The paper closes with a section on some of the current research issues, opportunities and challenges for regional geochemical mapping.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.738
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.184 · 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