MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2789689367 · doi:10.4095/306402

Factors controlling intrusion-related mineralization in Cape Breton Island, Nova Scotia: a comparison of Silurian-Devonian plutons in Ganderia and Avalonia

2018· report· en· W2789689367 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A Moning, S M Barr, Chris E. White, Gabriel Sombini dos Santos, Deanne van Rooyen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapePlutonNova scotiaDevonianGeologyIntrusionMineralization (soil science)OceanographyGeochemistryPaleontologyGeographyArchaeologyTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Devonian Gillis Mountain granitoid pluton in the Avalonian Mira terrane of southern Cape Breton Island hosts porphyry-style copper-molybdenum mineralization. In contrast, plutons of assumed similar age and containing similar rock types in the Leonard MacLeod Brook area of the Ganderian Aspy terrane of northern Cape Breton Island are not known to be mineralized. Hence a comparison of features such as host rocks, depth of emplacement, mineralogy, and chemical composition between plutons in these two areas may provide insight about factors controlling porphyry -style mineralization. During the summer of 2017, existing samples from the Gillis Mountain pluton were re-analyzed to obtain a modern set of trace element data, and previously unstudied drill core from the pluton was sampled for petrological study. Plutons in the Leonard MacLeod Brook area were mapped and sampled for petrological studies and dating, now in progress.

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 score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPaleontology and Stratigraphy of Fossils→French-language works237,207→