MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3040872542

Integrating petrophysical and geophysical data in forward and inversion modelling of Zone 5-8, Raglan Mine, Quebec, Canada

2018· article· en· W3040872542 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robin Alexander Maedel

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetrophysicsGeologyInversion (geology)GeophysicsSeismologyGeotechnical engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Raglan Mine is located on the Ungava peninsula, Québec, Canada. It’s a Ni-Cu-PGE magmatic sulphide deposit undergoing brownfield exploration. Given the available data from Raglan Mine and the underutilization of geophysical data integration in mineral exploration, this thesis’ purpose is to investigate the utility of data integration. Specifically, four objectives are set to integrate petrophysical and geophysical data in forward and inversion modelling of Zone 5-8 at Raglan Mine. The first two objectives are met through forward modelling a 3D geological model. Magnetic and gravity forward models are compared to observed data. The major outcome establishes a macro-magnetic susceptibility maximum for the ultramafic of 0.31 SI. Vertical gravity modelling shows lows over sediments, and highs over basalts and an intermediate high over the ultramafic. Additionally, the resolvability of ore targets is investigated, showing that these targets are unresolvable using airborne and terrestrial magnetic and gravity methods. These results are incorporated in inversion modelling. Inversion modelling is an optimization problem, which is non-unique, meaning many solutions could fit. This issue is mitigated through constraints from input data and reference models (cooperative inversion). Objectives 3 and 4 are met by running single parameter and cooperative inversions. Outcomes of single parameter inversions show that magnetic inversions are effective in outlining the UM unit to a depth of ~1000-1250m with a cut off of 0.05 SI. Single parameter gravity gradient inversions outline lower density sediments and higher density basalts. The ultramafic is outlined to depths of ~560-910m (cut off 0-0.3 g/cm3) after which ambiguity exists due to density overlap with basalt. Gravity gradient inversions are enhanced through the cooperative magnetic isosurface reference model, which also balances out the impact of the surface geology constraint. The gravity gradient isosurface constraint on the cooperative magnetic inversion causes the ultramafic limbs to diverge. Overall, forward modelling is able to approximate observed data, and single parameter and cooperative inversion modelling are able to position the magnetic ultramafic and higher and lower density sediments and basalts in geologically and geophysically logical locations. This approach has promising applications in other zones.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.169
Teacher spread0.160 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)→Same topicHydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis→French-language works237,207→