MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4320487789 · doi:10.4095/331430

Field relationships indicating cumulate intermingling at the Wrede Creek and Lunar Creek Alaskan-type ultramafic-mafic intrusions, north-central British Columbia

2023· report· en· W4320487789 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dejan Milidragovic, N R Cleven

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological and Geochemical Analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaficGeologyUltramafic rockGeochemistryMineralization (soil science)ChromiteTerraneLithologyProspectivity mappingGeomorphologyTectonicsPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Convergent margin-related magmatic deposits hosted by ultramafic-mafic intrusions are becoming an increasingly important global resource of Ni-Cu-PGE. In the northern Canadian Cordillera, a sub-class of ultramafic-mafic intrusions, known as the Alaskan-type intrusions, are hosted within the accreted arc terranes of the North American continental margin. These intrusions have long been recognized for their chromite-associated PGE mineralization potential. However, their potential to host significant Ni-Cu-PGE sulfide mineralization and to be used in efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through permanent carbon mineralization is becoming increasingly studied. This report describes the main lithologies and field relationships observed at the Wrede Creek and Lunar Creek Alaskan-type intrusions in British Columbia during recent fieldwork.

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 score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

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 studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeological and Geochemical Analysis→French-language works237,207→