MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2296530269 · doi:10.1144/geochem2015-371

Application of portable XRF to the direct analysis of till samples from various deposit types in Canada

2015· article· en· W2296530269 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeochemistry Exploration Environment Analysis · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchaeologyGeologyMineralogyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, results by direct portable XRF (‘pXRF’) on unsieved till samples were compared with those by established laboratory methods (aqua regia or fusion ICP-MS and ICP-ES) on the <0.063-mm fraction to determine if the application of direct pXRF in the field would serve as an acceptable guide for immediate follow-up work. Four test sites in Canada were chosen: the Halfmile Lake Cu-Pb-Zn VMS deposit; the intrusion-hosted W-Mo Sisson deposit; a Pb-Zn Mississippi Valley–type (MVT) deposit in the Pine Point district; and the Triple B kimberlite. Unsieved till samples from the GSC archive collection were used for this study and included samples from background areas, immediately overlying, and at various distances down-ice of each deposit. Ziploc® and Whirl-Pak® bags that were used to contain the samples in the field were tested for their properties of X-ray attenuation and contamination. In general, the performance of pXRF in the four test areas was very good where concentrations of elements of interest (indicator or pathfinder elements) were substantially above detection limits by this technique (in the low ppm range for many elements). The following elements, shown to be useful indicator elements (important constituents of the ore/commodity) or pathfinder elements (those associated with the commodity elements) by the established methodology, showed similar patterns by pXRF on the unsieved material: Zn, Cu, Pb, and As at Halfmile Lake; W, Mo, Cu, Zn, Pb, and As at the Sisson deposit; Zn, Pb, and Fe at Pine Point; and Ca, Sr, Cr, and Ni at Triple B. Pathfinder elements whose concentrations were too low for determination by pXRF include: Ag and Sb at Halfmile Lake; Ag and Cd at Sisson; Cd, S, and Se at Pine Point; and Co, Mg, P, U, and Th at Triple B. The high background for Bi by pXRF, equivalent to c . 50 ppm, and its noisy signal precluded its use at Halfmile Lake and Sisson. Elements which tended to show poor precision (three analyses each sample) by pXRF in some samples due to sample heterogeneity include Sn, V, and W. Mercury was erroneously reported for the majority of samples in the low ppm range by pXRF whereas its concentration in fact was in the low ppb range. Several Pb-, Zn- ( c . 1% Pb, Zn) and Fe-rich (up to 16% Fe) samples demonstrated spectral interferences by: Pb on As, Th and Se; Zn on Cu; and Fe on Co. Results for six till samples analysed in Ziploc® and Whirl-Pak® bags showed that Ziploc® absorbs fewer low-energy photons and hence is preferable for determining light elements such as Si, K and Ca. Supplementary material: Four data-sets are available at http://www.geolsoc.org.uk/SUP18897

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.175 · 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