Relevance of aeromagnetic data to revision of geological maps, Purcell Anticlinorium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Regional aeromagnetic data provide one of the few data sets having adequate resolution and distribution to contribute to geological mapping at "conventional" scales such as 1:250,000 or 1:50,000. In southeastern British Columbia compilation of a block of 12 geological maps at a scale of 1:50,000 is presently being undertaken as part of the Targeted Geoscience Initiative Program. These cover a large segment of the Purcell anticlinorium between 49 and 50. The compilation incorporates information acquired principally from earlier government mapping (generally at 1:50,000 scale), and by Teck Cominco Ltd. during an extended period of exploration for SEDEX deposits. Aeromagnetic data contribute to the compilation by examination of correlations between geologically mapped units and magnetic signatures, and by providing detailed magnetic images where the terrain is poorly mapped. New geological information thus obtained can be integrated into the new maps. Resolution is key to whether a magnetic data set can provide meaningful input into a geological map at a specific scale. About 25% of the compilation area is covered by high resolution aeromagnetic data (400 m line-spacing: 60 m flight elevation) yielding detailed images of the magnetic field that in turn reveal fine details of the geology in three survey areas known as Findlay Creek, St. Mary River and Yahk, identified as areas 1, 2 and 3 in the figure to the left. Lower resolution aeromagnetic data collected as part of Canada's National Aeromagnetic Mapping Program (805 m line-spacing, 305 m flight elevation) cover the entire area. Reprocessing of these data yields good quality magnetic images that can contribute to geological mapping, particularly when derivative images are used. Both the high and low resolution magnetic data sets provide insight into different aspects of the geology, and also raise questions, which can only be answered by ground follow up. Magnetic signatures reflect compositional zoning and marginal phases in various igneous intrusions, define unmapped faults, point to unmapped subunits within broader units, and indicate repositioning of certain geologically mapped contacts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".