MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981866888 · doi:10.4095/222151

Infrastructure and resources of the Northern Canadian Mainland Sedimentary Basin

2006· report· en· W2981866888 on OpenAlexaffabout
D W Morrow, A. Jones, J Dixon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural basinMainlandSedimentary rockGeologyGeographyOceanographyArchaeologyGeochemistryGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report summarizes infrastructure and resource information for an area of northwestern Canada extending between 60 and 70° north latitudes and 110 and 141° west longitudes across the northern Canadian mainland sedimentary basin. Political units, including First Nations boundaries are included along with railway, road, and trail networks, power distribution networks, as well as existing and proposed petroleum pipeline routes. Proven, or discovered, petroleum resources (1340 MMbl oil and 11.6 Tcf gas) are tabulated and illustrated, as well as all existing and previous precious and base metal mines and uranium, coal and other non-metallic mines. The northern Canadian mainland sedimentary basin of the report area is divided into petroleum exploration regions and areas that are characterized by unique geology and physiography. The report includes a series of formation tables that are unique to each exploration area and which include information concerning petroleum shows and source rocks in each exploration area. This report is one of a series of GSC Open File reports that are intended to be part of a geological atlas of the northern Canadian mainland sedimentary basin.

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)0.002
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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0080.014
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.165 · 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

Citations10
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207