MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2359717253

Application of GIS-Model Builder Technology for National Mineral Resource Assessment

2009· article· en· W2359717253 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Qinglin Xia

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth Science(Journal of China University of Geosciences) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceResource (disambiguation)Mineral resource classificationConceptual modelGeographic information systemData miningDatabaseGeographyGeologyCartography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mineral resources quantitative assessment involves processes of constructing models of various types from conceptual model,logical model,and mathematical model to GIS model etc..Large project like the national project for mineral resource potential assessment currently under operation by the Chinese Ministry of Land and Resources also involves interdisciplinary research teams specialized in geology,mineral deposits,mathematical model and GIS operation etc..It is essential to provide a common platform for these people to exchange ideas and make collective decisions on constructing geological concept models and quantitative models and on GIS procedures for model implementation with actual data input and output.This paper proposes a model builder technology to serve the above purpose.Sophisticated functions such as model iteration and user-machine interaction are developed and implemented in GeoDAS GIS.Case studies of information extraction,spatial analysis,prediction unit delineation and posterior probability mapping involved in gold mineral deposit prediction in Nova Scotia,Canada are covered to illustrate how model builder technology can be used in the whole processes of mineral resource assessment.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth Science(Journal of China University of Geosciences)Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207