Prospectivity Mapping of Heavy Mineral Ore Deposits Based upon Machine-Learning Algorithms: Columbite-Tantalite Deposits in West- Central Côte d’Ivoire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to model the prospectivity for placer deposits using geomorphic and landscape parameters. Within a geographic information system (GIS), spatial autocorrelation analysis of 3709 geochemical samples was used to identify prospective and non-prospective targets for columbite-tantalite (Nb-Ta) placer deposits of Hana-Lobo (H-L) Geological Complex (West- Central Côte d’Ivoire, West Africa). Based on mineralization system analysis, hydrologic, geomorphologic and landscape parameters were extracted at the locations of the identified targets. Supervised automatic classification approaches were applied, including Random Forest (RF), K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN) and Support Vector Machines (SVM) to find a prospectivity model complex enough to capture the nature of the data. Metrics such as cross-validation accuracy (CVA), Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves, Area Under Curve (AUC) values and F-score values were used to evaluate the performance and robustness of output models. Results of applying machine-learning algorithms demonstrated that predictions provided by the final RF and KNN models were very close (κ = 0.56 and CVA = 0.69; κ = 0.54 and CVA = 0.68, respectively) and those provided by the SVM models were slightly lower with κ = 0.46 and CVA = 0.63. Independent validation results confirmed the slightly higher performance of both KNN and RF prospectivity models, compared to final SVM. Sensitivity analyses of both KNN and RF prospectivity models for medium and high-grade Nb-Ta deposits show a prediction rate of up to 90%.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".