MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Orogenic gold prospectivity mapping using machine learning

2019· article· en· W2983906186 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mike McMillan, Jen Fohring, Eldad Haber, Justin Granek

Bibliographic record

VenueASEG Extended Abstracts · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia HospitalBC Hydro (Canada)Geoscience BCUniversity of British ColumbiaWestern Forest Products
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProspectivity mappingMineral explorationMetallogenyGeologyMineralization (soil science)Artificial intelligenceMining engineeringComputer scienceData scienceEarth scienceGeochemistryPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SummaryAs major mineral discoveries have become rarer over the last two decades, the industry has begun to turn to new technologies to assist in the exploration process. One such advancement is the application of machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) to geoscience data. Mineral prospectivity mapping has been around for decades but with the increase in computer power, recently it has gained traction again as a means for exploration teams to take full advantage of the numerous datasets at their disposal. Although having a team of human experts with a wealth of geoscience knowledge and experience is still fundamental to the exploration process, the ability to robustly integrate and analyse large geoscience datasets over vast spatial regions quickly becomes unwieldy if done manually.In this study, we developed a new algorithm for mineral prospectivity mapping using a VNet deep convolutional neural network and applied it to finding gold at the Committee Bay greenstone belt in the Canadian Arctic. The machine learning network took all the geoscience data available from the area and generated a prospectivity map for targeting economic orogenic gold mineralization. The results were subsequently validated on a separate nearby region where the machine predictions were compared to gold assay values from drilling. The gold assays from this region were not included in the training process, and the method demonstrated good success in predicting where the highest gold mineralization occurred.A subsequent gold prospectivity map was produced for the main area in question, and in addition to many new targets the VNet algorithm predicted many targets that the exploration team had previously generated. This suggests that this process assists the exploration team in vetting old targets while opening their eyes to new targets as well. In this way, the algorithm helps to vector in on prospective new and old areas while maximizing the value of all available geoscience data.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASEG Extended AbstractsSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207