MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809007578 · doi:10.4095/295945

Tectonic map of Arctic Canada

2015· report· en· W2809007578 on OpenAlexaffabout
M R St-Onge, John Harrison, D Paul, S Tella, T A Brent, C D Jauer, B C MacLean

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticTectonicsThe arcticGeologyGeographyOceanographyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Tectonic map of Arctic Canada (TeMAC) presents a tectonic synopsis of all onshore and offshore areas north of latitude 60°N at a scale of 1:4 000 000. Data sources include territorial and national compilations locally incorporating field work up to 2010 at scales of 1:100 000 to 1:5 000 000 and new compilation work for parts of Nunavut and Northwest Territories. One hundred and two tectonic domains are documented and include: 5 cratons, 37 basins, 2 platforms, 3 shelves, 2 plains, 1 ridge, 3 oceanic domains, 7 cover sequences, 15 accreted terranes, 16 magmatic suites, and 11 orogens. Stripe patterns are utilized to indicate the extent of orogenic overprinting with stripe colour keyed to individual orogens. Applications of TeMAC include 1) providing a new tectonic compilation and database context for Arctic Canada; 2) encouraging frontier mineral and energy exploration; and 3) providing general support for the geological framework developed for the delineation of the outer limits of Canada's Arctic continental shelf.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0100.017
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.004

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207