MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4398770280 · doi:10.1144/geochem2023-068

Gold in eskers and gyttja overlying auriferous till, Regnault deposit, Quebec

2024· article· en· W4398770280 on OpenAlexaffabout
Don I. Cummings, Andy Orr, Francis A. Macdonald

Bibliographic record

VenueGeochemistry Exploration Environment Analysis · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyGeochemistryGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Regnault gold deposit in Quebec, Canada, was discovered by Kenorland Minerals North America Ltd in 2020 following identification of a gold-in-till dispersal train. In 2022, two non-traditional media – eskers and organic lake-bottom mud (gyttja) – were sampled to determine if they likewise contained gold anomalies that vectored the mineral deposit. Striking, coherent (mappable) anomalies exist in both media. The gold-in-esker dispersal train has a similar pathfinder element association as the gold-in-till dispersal train (e.g. Te, W) but contains approximately twice the gold (average 73 ppb Au) in the <63 µm fraction. It is hypothesized to be a meltwater-sorted version of the gold-in-till train, sourced from the erosional esker corridor some 3 km upflow. By contrast, the gold-in-gyttja dispersal train is substantially different to both the gold-in-esker and gold-in-till dispersal trains. It has lost significant association with pathfinder elements, contains an order of magnitude less gold (average 4.2 ppb Au), and is tentatively hypothesized to have a hydromorphic origin, sourced primarily from the gold-in-till dispersal train. The main takeaway from the study is that the sampling of any of these three media – eskers, gyttja or till – could have conceivably led to the discovery.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.620
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.194 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeochemistry Exploration Environment AnalysisSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207