Predictive Modeling of Canadian Carbonatite-Hosted REE +/− Nb Deposits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Carbonatites are the primary geological sources for rare earth elements (REEs) and niobium (Nb). This study applies machine learning techniques to generate national-scale prospectivity models and support mineral exploration targeting of Canadian carbonatite-hosted REE +/− Nb deposits. Extreme target feature label imbalance, diverse geological settings hosting these deposits throughout Canada, selecting negative labels, and issues regarding the interpretability of some machine learning models are major challenges impeding data-driven prospectivity modeling of carbonatite-hosted REE +/− Nb deposits. A multi-stage framework, exploiting global hierarchical tessellation model systems, data-space similarity measures, ensemble modeling, and Shapley additive explanations was coupled with convolutional neural networks (CNN) and random forest to meet the objectives of this work. A risk – return analysis was further implemented to assist with model interpretation and visualization. Multiple models were compared in terms of their predictive ability and their capability of reducing the search space for mineral exploration. The best-performing model, derived using a CNN that incorporates public geoscience datasets, exhibits an area under the curve for receiver operating characteristics plot of 0.96 for the testing labels, reducing the search area by 80%, while predicting all known carbonatite-hosted REE +/− Nb occurrences. The framework used in our study allows for an explicit definition of input vectors and provides a clear interpretation of outcomes generated by prospectivity models.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".