MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328484678 · doi:10.1071/aseg2007ab181

Geophysical Interpretation of the Braidwood Granodiorite on the Braidwood 1:100 000 Sheet

2007· article· en· W2328484678 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carlos Cevallos

Bibliographic record

VenueASEG Extended Abstracts · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyPetrographyGeochemistryIntrusionMineral explorationRadiometric datingMagnetiteMineral resource classificationGeophysicsPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractInterpretation based on the Total Magnetic Intensity (TMI), gravity, radiometric and digital elevation data acquired as a part of the Exploration NSW initiative, focused on the northern part of the Braidwood Granodiorite and its extension to the north of the Shoalhaven River. The use of image processing Sobel filters on the TMI gridded data enhance characteristics such as faults and regional stress fields that would otherwise be very difficult to observe.Compared to other granites, the Braidwood Granodiorite is unusually magnetic. Palaeomagnetic studies are being conducted along with petrographic work to determine whether the magnetite in the granite is a primary magmatic mineral or the result of secondary alteration.The Dargues Reef gold deposit lies within the southern part of the Braidwood Granodiorite. It is a member of the intrusion-related gold deposit class that includes Timbarra in NSW and Kidston and Red Dome in Queensland. These four deposits are associated with potassic, oxidised I-type granites that contrast with other overseas intrusion-related gold examples (e.g. Alaska-Yukon), which are reduced and non-magnetic.Technical Area: Geophysics in Government Surveys

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.726
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASEG Extended AbstractsSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207