MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2981516823 · doi:10.4095/299022

NATMAP - Canada's National Geoscience Mapping Program: 1991-2002

2017· report· en· W2981516823 on OpenAlexaffabout
Brian Robertson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEarth scienceGeologyGeographyLibrary scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Geoscience Mapping Program (NATMAP) was launched by the Geological Survey of Canada in 1991 in response to a concern of the country's mineral exploration community that the level of geological mapping by Canada's federal and provincial/territorial surveys was no longer adequate to assist companies in new exploration ventures into more remote or poorly understood regions. The principles and practices of the NATMAP Program were developed in GSC-led deliberations with its counterpart surveys and industry representatives. For the first time, major geological mapping projects would be formally coordinated and collaborated studies by the public geosciences agencies, utilizing their resident and relevant expertise and funds to produce a new era of geological maps incorporating data from several geosciences disciplines and in digital formats. The thirteen NATMAP projects undertaken over the Program's thirteen-year span were proposed, reviewed, funded and renewed by management and advisory panels according to a series of criteria for project suitability and operations - a process that has since become the standard for GSC project management. The success of NATMAP undoubtedly lies in the important advances in Canada's geosciences database and integrated knowledge. The scientific results of the individual NATMAP projects, covering one million km2 across nine provinces and three territories, have been published and communicated elsewhere in well over 500 maps and 1500 reports. This compilation provides information for each project's rationale, component studies and methodologies, some high-level findings and their implications, plus impacts attributable to acceptance of the results by the resource exploration and public policy sectors, perhaps a decade or more later. In general terms, NATMAP accomplished its original goal of providing the new geoscience required by the private sector to refine its exploration strategies in areas of previous interest and to advance with some confidence into regions that were formerly considered too uncertain because of the poor quality of the extant geological knowledge. Virtually all of the projects targeted at this industry have seen new claims, staking and detailed surveys and exploration over the newly mapped terranes. In some instances, follow up of geophysical or geochemical anomalies identified during the NATMAP investigations have led to the discovery of potential economic deposits. NATMAP projects over portions of sedimentary basins in western and eastern Canada helped define the 3-dimensional extent of suitable lithologies and structures for oil and gas deposits have seen the immediate drilling of significant numbers of exploratory wells. This latter activity, plus the mineral exploration ventures, have already contributed hundreds of millions of dollars to the Canadian economy. Important results were also achieved in the NATMAP projects that addressed issues of groundwater source recognition and protection, terrain stability and aggregate resource potential, contributing to new, related public policy debates and regulations. It is unlikely that the total contribution of the NATMAP geosciences, in terms of providing the knowledge upon which future resource discoveries will be made, will be compiled or calculated. Nonetheless, the role played by Canada's geological surveys in NATMAP and its successor projects and programs, will continue to support a broad spectrum of issues for which geoscience knowledge is fundamental.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score0.545

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.016
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.007

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 head0.291
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping→French-language works237,207→