MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2465341683 · doi:10.5539/esr.v5n2p121

Geochemical Examination of Surficial Soil Overlying Uranium Deposit in Manyoni, Central Tanzania

2016· article· en· W2465341683 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Miguta Faustine Ngulimi, Hiroaki Ishiga

Bibliographic record

VenueEarth Science Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
KeywordsUraniumGeologyGeochemistryDeposition (geology)Soil waterMineralogySedimentary depositional environmentEnvironmental chemistryStructural basinChemistryGeomorphologySoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geochemical compositions of surface to shallow soil samples of Manyoni uranium deposit in Tanzania were determined by X-ray fluorescence analysis (XRF). Uranium, calcium and chlorine are abundant at the depth of 40 cm to 140 cm. Strong correlations between U, CaO and chlorine suggest uranium and carbonates deposition in a Salt Lake system. Strontium content is higher (370 to 480 ppm) than the average upper continental crust UCC (320 ppm) at the depth of 60 cm to 120 cm suggesting Sr accumulation in carbonates. TiO2 and Fe2O3 abundances appear along the profile but have normal concentrations below the average UCC content. Vanadium is positively correlated to Fe2O3 and Ni (mafic sources) concentrations and negatively correlated to U. Uranium precipitation is suggestive of abrupt evaporation during dry season at Manyoni depositional basin. Chlorine (Cl) with high concentration in the vertical profile may be yielded in the sediments after evaporation of the lake water.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarth Science ResearchSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207