MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808111462 · doi:10.1144/geochem2017-064

Primary geochemical haloes study of the possibly Carlin-like Dashui gold deposit for gold exploration in southern Gansu Province, central China

2018· article· en· W2808111462 on OpenAlexaff
Yongquan Li, Dehui Zhang, Nan Yang, Tao Zhang, Wenquan Shi

Bibliographic record

VenueGeochemistry Exploration Environment Analysis · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaGeologyGeochemistryGold orePrimary (astronomy)Mining engineeringGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To increase the reserves of the possibly Carlin-like Dashui gold deposit in Maqu county, Gansu Province, central China, exploration techniques to detect mineralization in the subsurface of the mining district are required. Orebodies in the Dashui deposit are usually controlled by structures closely associated with the Ge'erkuohe granitoid. Samples collected from the deposit area indicate that the mineralization is primarily associated with the indicator elements, Au-Ag-As-Hg-Te-Sb, and less so with the indicator elements, K 2 O-Rb-F-Ba. The supra- and/or near-ore haloes are characterized by an As-Sb-Hg-Te-Au-Ag association and sub-ore haloes by a W-Mo-Bi-Co-Sc-Ni-V-Cd association. The primary geochemical haloes of the two main orebodies show that they were formed by up to three hydrothermal events. These results indicated that the two orebodies may extend downward to great depths, as was later confirmed by drilling down to depths of c. 3500–3400 m.

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 score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeochemistry Exploration Environment AnalysisSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207