MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911077751 · doi:10.4095/223434

Remote predictive mapping of surficial materials on northern Baffin Island: developing and testing techniques using Landsat TM and digital elevation data

2007· report· en· W2911077751 on OpenAlexaffabout
O Brown, Jeffrey R. Harris, D J Utting, E C Little

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital elevation modelElevation (ballistics)GeologyRemote sensingOceanographyCartographyGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considering the vastness of Nunavut, the paucity of regional-scale surficial geology maps for the territory, the significant expense of working in a remote region, and the increasing availability of affordable, remotely sensed data, it is timely to develop and test remote predictive mapping techniques for producing surficial geology maps. The goal of this remote predictive mapping project is to produce a surficial materials map, which will be used to expedite subsequent ground-based mapping and sampling. This paper describes techniques used to produce a surficial materials map for an area in northern Baffin Island using remote predictive mapping techniques with LandsatTMand digital elevation data. The predictive maps produced in advance of the field work (i.e. "ground truthing") were found to be approximately 50% accurate. To improve remote predictive mapping accuracy to at least 80%, high-resolution imagery may need to be included in the remote predictive mapping protocol.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207