MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015094005 · doi:10.4095/322191

Indicator-mineral signatures of the Casino porphyry Cu-Au-Mo deposit, Yukon

2020· report· en· W3015094005 on OpenAlexaffabout
M B McClenaghan, M W McCurdy, C E Beckett-Brown, Scott Casselman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSphaleriteGeologyPyriteGeochemistryMineralHeavy mineralChalcopyritePorphyry copper depositJarositeMineralogyChemistryHydrothermal circulationFluid inclusionsProvenanceCopper

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This open file reports the results of an indicator mineral case study carried out around the Casino porphyry Cu-Mo-Au deposit in the unglaciated terrain of the west central Yukon. The research was part of the Geological Survey of Canada's (GSC) Targeted Geoscience Initiative 5 (TGI-5) Program. The purpose of the study was to test the use of indicator minerals as a porphyry Cu exploration tool in unglaciated terrain. At 22 sites around the deposit, a bulk stream sediment sample was collected to document the indicator mineral signature of the deposit. Steam water and stream silt samples were also collected at the same sites to compare geochemical to heavy mineral signatures. This open file presents indicator mineral abundance data for the bulk stream sediment samples. The Casino deposit has an obvious indicator mineral signature in the <2 mm heavy (>3.2 specific gravity (SG)) and mid-density (2.8-3.2 SG) fractions of stream sediments that consists of, in order of usefulness: gold>chalcopyrite>molybdenite>sphalerite>jarosite>goethite>pyrite that is detectable at least 14 km downstream. Similar indicator mineral patterns in other creeks indicate the presence of additional porphyry style mineralization nearby. Detailed characterization of the mineral chemistry of tourmaline and scheelite that is in progress will determine their suitability for porphyry Cu exploration in this unglaciated terrain. Government and exploration surveys will benefit from the addition of indicator mineral sampling to routine stream sediment sampling protocols.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.922
Threshold uncertainty score0.155

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.005

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207