Inspirations from the Sino-U.S. cooperative geological mapping in the East Kunlun orogenic belt: ideas and methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On the basis of the practice of the Sino-U.S. cooperative in the East Kunlun Orogenic Belt and through the comparative analysis of several examples completed recently by USGS, we have a further knowledge of the method and idea of America mapping. Although the application of geophysics and 3S technology in is in continuous development, the fundamental method and idea of America and the style of reports remain the same ever since the establishment of USGS. The concept of mapping all lithological unites hasn′t changed within a difficult course of 130 years along with USGS′s evolution. The method of geological features guiding trails has been always been followed in America historty. Whereas, high accuracy geophysical method commonly applied in thick-bed weathering crusts of Australia and ice-snow covering areas of Canada is not used in the of orogenic belts, but the remote-sensing technique provides an important support for the of bedrock areas of orogenic belts.The key of high efficiency of America bedrock areas can not be interpreted by using advanced geophysical and remote-sensing techniques. In fact, utilization of existing results, standardized work mode, rational aiming of field and scientific research, the concise report, and the GIS application are quite detrimental.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".