Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Geological and mineral maps in India are prepared using 1: 63,360 or 1:50,000 or 1:25,000 scale topographic maps prepared by the Survey of India as base. These are later compiled into smaller scales like 1:250,000 or 1:500,000 or 1:1,000,000 (commonly referred to as quarter million, half million or one million maps respectively) or larger scales depending on the need. These various scales represent the ratio of ground distances to those on the maps. The scale to be adopted depends upon the coverage or depth of details required. Geological maps show the spatial distribution of the various rock formations, their characteristics, as also the associated mineral occurrences or deposits on the respective topographic maps or topo sheets using standard colours and character symbols, as indicated in the legends accompanying these maps. Such maps while serving the professional geological needs represent just a flash of colours to the common man or a student. Of late there has been a lack of interest and appreciation of the wonderful branch of science, geology, among the upwardly mobile youth. Only a few take up geology for their graduate or post graduate studies and still less choose it for a career. At primary and secondary schools, the subject is almost unheard of. This situation is mainly due to lack of understandable information about the nature of the subject, its glamour and its inevitable utility in location of mineral deposits and interpreting the natural history of the geoenvironment. The pictorial colour coded geological and mineral map (Fig. 1) is a determined first step in reversing this disturbing trend of lack of interest in understanding the geoenvironment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.070 | 0.019 |
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".