MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809599163 · doi:10.4095/288959

Geology, southern part of Prince Albert Greenstone Belt, Prince Albert Hills, Melville Peninsula, Nunavut

2011· report· en· W2809599163 on OpenAlexaffabout
Giseli Modolo Vieira Machado, Gilles Houle, L Richan, J RIGG, D Corrigan

Bibliographic record

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

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supracrustal rocks of western Melville Peninsula form the Prince Albert Greenstone Belt, which is comprised of rocks dated 2.9 Ga and attributed to the Prince Albert Group, a distinctive lithostratigraphic unit of the Rae Craton. The belt is subdivided into three supracrustal packages based on field relationships and lithological associations. The snake supracrustal packagewhich is comprised mainly of mafic to intermediate subaqueous metavolcanic and metavolcaniclastic rocks with lesser meta-ultramafic flows/sills and metavolcaniclastic rocks, outcrops at the base of the succession. The Borealis supracrustal package consists of felsic to intermediate, brecciated to massive metavolcanic rocks all containing quartz phenocrysts. The Triangle Lake supracrustal package is dominated by mafic to intermediate metavolcanic rocks intercalated with banded iron- formations and subordinate felsic to intermediate metavolcaniclastic rocks. During mapping, the discovery of a nickel showing in a meta-ultramafic intrusion and of a silver-zinc gossan within metavolcaniclastic rocks highlights the mineral potential of the Prince Albert Greenstone Belt.

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 score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.411

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207