MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2790866615 · doi:10.4095/306468

Structural and lithologic controls on the nature and distribution of gold in the BIF-associated 1150 and 1250 lode series at Tiriganiaq, Meliadine district, Rankin Inlet greenstone belt, Nunavut

2018· report· en· W2790866615 on OpenAlexaffabout
B St. Pierre, P Mercier-Langevin, M Simard, O Côté-Mantha, M Malo, G Servelle

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLodeGreenstone beltLithologyGeologySeries (stratigraphy)GeochemistryArchaeologyGeographyArcheanPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Meliadine gold project is located within the Rankin Inlet greenstone belt, Nunavut; one of Canada's largest emerging gold districts. A large part of the 1000 and 1100 ore zones or 'lodes' at the Tiriganiaq mine are closely associated with the moderately to steeply north-dipping Lower fault and are characterized by decimetre to metre wide laminated, fault-fill veins and associated deformed extensional veins. Other ore zones such as the 1150 and 1250 lodes, north of the 1000 and 1100 lodes, appear to have a more complex geometry. Preliminary research indicates that the main controls on gold distribution within the 1150 lode series are Lower fault parallel, narrow north-dipping reverse shears that overprint the slightly steeper, north-dipping main foliation and associated axial planar tight folds. Shallowly south-dipping extension veins associated with the shear zones and related fault-fill veins are preferentially developed in tightly folded decimetre to metre thick BIF layers around the moderately north-dipping reverse shears.

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)0.001
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 score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.241
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 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping→French-language works237,207→