Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The risks associated with, geographic locations of, and engagement strategies required by exploration companies have shifted in the last 25 years, largely in response to changing public attitudes and governance approaches. A mixture of growing global environmental consciousness, the rise of international civil society networks, and economic liberalization and government deregulation in the developing world have all played key roles in altering the environment for mineral exploration. Three fundamental tenets of a positive climate for exploration have been altered: access to land, ease and speed of permitting, and the right to mine deposits after discovery. This paper identifies the importance of new stakeholders, including nongovernmental organizations, international financial institutions, and community activist networks; new governance approaches, such as self-regulation, the use of international standards and co-management, and new monitoring and engagement techniques, such as environmental and social impact assessment, thirdparty monitoring, and prior informed consent. The traditional relationship focus between states and corporations has been replaced by constantly evolving relationships among corporations, governments, civil society, and affected communities. Exploration companies, particularly junior companies, must use available tools—early community engagement strategies and available guidance documents from industry associations among them—to adapt themselves to this new focus.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".