MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2982256510 · doi:10.4095/296679

Revised geological framework for the McFaulds Lake greenstone belt, Ontario

2015· report· en· W2982256510 on OpenAlexaffabout
R T Metsaranta, M G Houlé, V J McNicoll, Sandra L. Kamo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenstone beltGeologyGeochemistryArchean

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The McFaulds Lake greenstone belt (MLGB) is an extensive (>200 km long), arcuate-shaped, Meso- to Neoarchean, greenstone belt located in the central part of the Oxford-Stull domain of northern Ontario. The MLGB records a history of episodic volcanism, sedimentation, ultramafic-felsic intrusive activity and tectonism spanning from at least 2.83 to 2.66 Ga. Supracrustal rocks are tentatively subdivided into 7 tectonostratigraphic assemblages based on mapping, U-Pb geochronology, and geophysical interpretation. Mafic and ultramafic intrusive rocks comprise at least two distinct suites: a mafic-dominated, large layered intrusive suite represented by the Highbank-Fishtrap intrusive complex that was emplaced at ca. 2810 Ma, and an ultramafic to mafic intrusive suite termed the Ring of Fire intrusive suite. The latter comprises an ultramafic-dominated subsuite with significant Cr-Ni-Cu-PGE mineralization, and a mafic-dominated subsuite that contains significant Fe-Ti-V-(P) mineralization that was emplaced at ca. 2734 Ma.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0490.006

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research→French-language works237,207→