MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3029770114 · doi:10.34194/ggub.v189.5160

The Nalunaq gold prospect, South Greenland: test mining for feasibility studies

2001· article· en· W3029770114 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mogens Lind, Lotte Kludt, Brian Ballou

Bibliographic record

VenueGeology of Greenland Survey Bulletin · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMineral Processing and Grinding
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrewFjordCorporationSample (material)GeographyEnvironmental resource managementEngineeringOceanographyEnvironmental scienceMining engineeringArchaeologyGeologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Nalunaq narrow-vein gold prospect is situated 40 km north-east of Nanortalik, the southernmost town in Greenland, 6 km inland from the fjord Saqqaa (Fig. 1). The exploration licence is held by Nalunaq I/S, a company jointly owned by Crew Development Corporation, Canada (67%) and NunaMinerals A/S, Greenland (33%). A pre-feasibility study of March 1999 by an independent mining consulting company commented positively on the Nalunaq prospect (Nalunaq I/S, personal communication 1999). However, assessment of the sample database demonstrated considerable variation in grade estimates depending on the use of drillcores, chip or saw-cut samples as well as the capping levels (reducing the highest assay values to a fixed value). To advance this project to the feasibility level, the pre-feasibility study stressed the need for improved grade verification and demonstration of grade continuity. In preparation for a feasibility study, a Can$ 9 million underground test mining and bulk sampling programme was executed during the summer 2000 field season. Strathcona Mineral Services Limited (Canada) designed the programme in conjunction with Nalunaq personnel. This report focuses on the field aspects of the programme; processing of field and laboratory data is still in progress (January 2001).

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)0.003
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeology of Greenland Survey BulletinSame topicMineral Processing and GrindingFrench-language works237,207