MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281661869 · doi:10.1190/tle41060400.1

Downhole density estimation using multielement geochemistry and machine learning

2022· article· en· W4281661869 on OpenAlexaff
Sebastian D. Goodfellow, Nan Wei, Chris Drielsma, Vince Gerrie, Larry Petrie

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Leading Edge · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsDenison Mines (Canada)Geoscience BCOntario Tobacco Research UnitCMC Microsystems (Canada)Hudbay Minerals (Canada)MRF Geosystems (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoreholeGeologyBulk densityMineralogySoil scienceGeotechnical engineeringSoil water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Machine learning (ML) was used to estimate bulk density from multielement geochemistry. At the Wheeler River site, host to the Phoenix and Gryphon uranium deposits, multielement geochemistry data were acquired for 829 exploration holes. Of those holes, 41 were logged with a downhole dual-spaced density probe during several mobilizations between 2009 and 2019. Density measurements were collected to provide constraints for inversions of airborne gravity data. To improve the density model's spatial resolution, ML models were trained to estimate bulk density from collocated multielement geochemistry data. Two geochemical laboratory methods were used (251 holes for the old method and 578 holes for the new method); therefore, two separate models were trained. Leave-one-hole-out cross-validation mean absolute error (MAE) results from the old and new geochemistry models showed similar scores of 0.027 g/cm3 and 0.025 g/cm3, respectively. Eight test holes were removed from the training data and used for final evaluation once the model was trained. Test hole results showed MAE scores of 0.026 g/cm3 for the old geochemistry model and 0.043 g/cm3 for the new geochemistry model. A unique aspect of this data set was the presence of repeat logs for multiple boreholes over a decade-long logging campaign. This provided the opportunity to assess the measurement uncertainty across time, density probes, operators, and boreholes conditions. The process of estimating downhole density from multielement geochemistry data could be used for many exploration projects to help generate better starting density models for use in geophysical inversions and other applications.

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 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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.544
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Leading EdgeSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207