MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quantitative appraisal of Heliborne and ground-based Time Domain Electromagnetic surveys for uranium exploration – A case study from Rajasthan, India

2010· article· en· W4230120785 on OpenAlexaff
Ashish Chaturvedi, Cas Lötter, K. J. Rao, A. K. Maurya, I. Patra, Anjan Chaki

Bibliographic record

VenueASEG Extended Abstracts · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsAdvanced Micro Devices (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUraniumUraniniteGeologyBoreholeMining engineeringGeochemistryUranium oreMineralogyGeophysicsPaleontologyMetallurgyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SummarySoda-metasomatised and metasediments hosted uranium deposits constitute 18% of the world’s uranium resources. In India, such deposits are identified along the albitite line in the environs of North Delhi Fold Belts in the state of Rajasthan. These are structurally controlled with association of albitisation and pyroxenisation of metasediments, metallic sulphides and carbonaceous phyllites. Uraninite is the dominant mineral phase along with copper, molybdenum and sulphides. The low resistivity of the fractures associated with metallic minerals produces a significant contrast with the host rock, which can be located with electromagnetic methods. High-resolution heliborne geophysical surveys comprising of VTEM, magnetic and gamma-ray spectrometric were conducted to identify uranium deposits in the vicinity of albitite zone. This paper demonstrates the results of heliborne and ground followup geophysical surveys to prioritize targets for uranium exploration. For the first time in India, a ground based Time Domain Electromagnetic survey employing Geonics EM37 system was conducted over one of the target areas delineated based on the VTEM surveys. Interpreted results from ground data correlate well with the spatial locations of the EM conductors delineated from heliborne surveys. Additionally modelling of heliborne and ground data produces comparable physical parameters. The results obtained are extremely useful in planning the boreholes in ongoing exploration programme.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASEG Extended AbstractsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207