MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330376841 · doi:10.1071/aseg2013ab296

3D conductivity models of Lalor Lake VMS deposit from ground loop and airborne EM data sets

2013· article· en· W2330376841 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

VenueASEG Extended Abstracts · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInversion (geology)GeologyGround truthElectrical conductorMagnetic surveyMagnetometerRemote sensingMineralogyMining engineeringGeophysicsSeismologyMagnetic anomalyComputer scienceEngineeringElectrical engineeringMagnetic fieldTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lalor Lake is a VMS deposit in central Manitoba, Canada. The deep ore body is buried under the cover rocks up to 1000 m. Multiple EM data sets were collected to delineate the compact and conductive alteration zones and two data sets are available to us. The first is HELITEM, an airborne time-domain EM survey that covers the entire exploration area. The second is a ground loop EM data measured by SQUID magnetometers that have high precision at late times. The two data sets map the conductivity structures at Lalor Lake in different ways: the airborne survey covers a broad area but has limited resolving power at depth; the ground survey provides information about the deep targets through very late times but the measurements were made in a smaller area. Individual 3D inversions were carried out for both data sets assuming little a prior information. Both are able to recover the trace of the expected ore body, but the airborne model is smooth and the ground model contains highly conductive anomalies. Then we invert the ground data again with the airborne model as the reference model. The new inversion again confirms the existence of the VMS ore body but also rearranges the conductive material according to the constraints from the reference model. The new model differs significantly from the blind inversion model at the deposit scale. Based on the information from the inversion so far, we conclude both surveys have picked up signals from the ore body in different levels of detail. More analysis and further data are still required to better delineate the target’s geometry.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.211 · 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