MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120039199 · doi:10.15421/112057

World mineral deposits in the table of periodic chemical elements

2020· article· en· W3120039199 on OpenAlex
Alexander Beydik, Serhii Syrovets, N. Koroma, Mykola A. Molochko

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geology Geography and Geoecology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Gasification Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMineral resource classificationGeologyEarth scienceContext (archaeology)Table (database)MineralChinaSubsoilGeographyGeochemistryPhysical geographyArchaeologyPaleontologySoil scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The distribution of mineral deposits and the distribution of chemical elements on the globe are characterized by heterogeneity. A wide range of publications of domestic and foreign specialists - geologists, geographers, geochemists, economists - were dedicated to mineral resources of the world, mineral deposits. During processing the material the comparative-geographical, cartographic (analysis of minerals maps, mineral resources in the context of continents and regions of the world, cartographic interpretation of Mendeleev periodical table), monographic (analysis of fundamental works of leading domestic and foreign geologists and resource scientists, geologists and geologists, and geologists and geologists) directories, multi-volume editions devoted to geology and mineral resources of individual countries and regions of the world) methods, systematic approach, and GIS technologies - all these were used for received data processing and systematization. Explored mineral deposits (current and potential) form on the planet both individual local deposits and geochemical zones – areas where economically valuable chemical elements and their compounds are concentrated, which are diverse in genesis, stocks, and possibilities of exploitation. The largest of the latter is the Appalachians in the US - the Western Hemisphere, the Highveld in South Africa, Khibiny and the Ural Mountains inRussia - the Eastern Hemisphere. The leading countries in which most geochemical resources are extracted from the subsoil are the United States (65% of the total elements of Mendeleev periodical table), Russia (48%), China (38%), Canada (38%), South Africa (30%), Australia, (27%), Kazakhstan (19%), India (14%), Mexico (13%). The ideas about the level of provision of mineral resources and minerals in individual countries and territories of the world were systematized. The Mendeleev periodical table and its mineral and raw content were presented as an objective factor in the international geographical distribution of labor. The illuminated issues are confirmed high density of interdisciplinary links (geology, geography, chemistry, geochemistry, ecology, economics, regional studies, zoning).

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · 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