EXPLORATION GEOCHEMISTRY UPDATES AND POSSLBLE TRENDS FROM THE 21TH LNTERNATIONAL GEOCHEMICAL EXPLORATION SYMPOSIUM[HT7]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 21th International Geochemical Exploration Symposium (21th IGES) was held in Dublin, Ireland during August 28～September 3, 2003. Over 200 delegates from 27 nations attended the meeting. Fifty-eight papers were orally presented and fifty papers were posted at the meeting. In addition to the scientific program, the Annual General Meeting of the AEG (Association of Exploration Geochemits) passed a resolution for the name change from AEG to AAG (Association of Applied Geochemits). Conventional geochemical exploration techniques such as soil and stream sediment surveys have been playing an important role in mineral exploration, while lithogeochemistry and hydrogeochemistry are still lasting interests for geochemists. A great attention has being paid to the study of deep-penetrating techniques and its formation mechanism in overburden, which represents the future of exploration geochemistry, in the world recently; indicator minerals, isotopes and biogeochemical methods were studied for particular mineral deposits in the special landscapes, Canada and Australia. ICP/MS has been conventional procedures for the analysis of elements and isotopes in geochemical samples. Although the number of papers on environmental geochemistry was increased, most of them were related to the environmental geochemistry of mines or mineral deposits.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.020 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".