MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2998534886 · doi:10.2138/gselements.15.6.411

Diamond Exploration and Resource Evaluation of Kimberlites

2019· article· en· W2998534886 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueElements · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsDe Beers (Canada)Geological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKimberliteDiamondGeologyGeochemistryMantle (geology)Earth sciencePetrologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kimberlites are the main source of natural gem-quality diamonds. The intrepid diamond explorer faces three major problems. First, finding a small, usually less than 300 m diameter, kimberlite, which is often highly weathered. Second, evaluating the quantity of diamonds within a kimberlite that often consists of multiple phases of intrusive and extrusive kimberlite, each with potentially different diamond grades. Third, evaluating the rough diamonds, the value of which is dependent on carat-weight, shape, colour, and clarity. Modern advances in mantle petrology, geophysics, geochemistry, geomorphology, and geostatistics now complement historical exploration knowledge and aid in selecting prospective target areas, resource estimation, and evaluating kimberlite-hosted diamond deposits.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.205 · 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