Determination of the erosion level of a porphyry copper deposit using soil geochemistry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As exploration is time-consuming, costly, and risky, determination of the erosion surface of a metalliferous deposit before geophysical surveying and exploration drilling might be very helpful. Geochemical haloes can be used to determine whether the erosion surface is supra-ore or sub-ore and thus reduce the risk of exploration operations. The aim of this investigation is to determine the erosion surface of the North ROK porphyry deposit (NRPD) in northwestern British Columbia in Canada using linear productivity (LP), which is the content of an element defining the halo multiplied by the width of the halo. A total of 2045 soil samples from the B horizon were analysed using ICP-MS for 36 elements, including Cu, Mo, Pb, Zn, Au, As, Ag, Ni, Co, Fe, and Mn. The data-set was snalysed to obtain the statistical parameters and the elements Cu, Mo, Pb, and Zn were chosen to calculate the linear productivity and the total linear productivity. These four elements were modelled using probability plots to identify and separate subpopulations in terms of anomalous haloes and background, including the threshold values of each subpopulation. The results of the probability plot modelling and thresholds values were then used to map the distribution of each element in a GIS to calculate the linear productivity. The total linear productivity indicated that the erosion surface is supra-ore. Finally, a 3D orebody model of the Cu, Mo, Pb, and Zn distributions was constructed using borehole data and used to validate the results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".