MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Overcoming survival bias in targeting mineral deposits of the future: Towards null and negative tests of the exploration search space, accounting for lack of visibility

2024· article· en· W4401803862 on OpenAlexaff
Mahyar Yousefi, Vesa Nykänen, Jeff W. Harris, Jon Hronsky, Oliver P. Kreuzer, Guillaume Bertrand, Mark Lindsay

Bibliographic record

VenueOre Geology Reviews · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsGeoscience BC
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisibilityGeologyPolitical scienceGeochemistryLibrary scienceGeographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Survival bias concept is adapted for mineral exploration. • Next generations of mineral deposits are defined. • Analysis of the exploration search spaces in terms of Null and Negative tests is proposed. • Targeting mineral deposits of the future is discussed. • The findings have implications for the future development of exploration information systems. Broad consensus exists amongst mineral explorers that most outcropping mineral deposits have been found. The next generation of discoveries will rely on our ability to recognize the subtle or cryptic signals of deep-seated deposits. Exploration targeting under such conditions requires greater knowledge of the processes that formed the targeted mineral deposit types and new or improved exploration methods designed to effectively test for buried mineralization. Survival bias is a form of selection bias that is defined as the logical error resulting from neglecting data or information because of their “lack of visibility”. In this study, “lack of visibility” refers to situations where (i) mineral explorers ignore or overlook particular terrain because it lacks or contains only weak signals of a mineralizing system, and (ii) such areas are excluded from further exploration as the existing data or information neither confirm nor support the targeting model. Therefore, it is critical to more comprehensively analyze a search space to more confidentially determine whether a terrain without the desired targeting signals satisfies the criteria of a null or negative test. The idea for this study is based on the notion that if a buried mineral deposit was present in an overlooked terrain it would nevertheless comprise distinctive geological features and targeting signals to guide the explorer, although, more likely than not, these signals would be very weak. Here we used a porphyry copper (Cu) district in Iran to explain and illustrate the adaptation of the survival bias concept. More specifically, in this study we tested the usefulness of a recently proposed targeting criterion, namely sites of potential focused fluid flux, as an input to mineral prospectivity analysis and exploration targeting. The findings of our study have implications for the future development of regional- to global-scale exploration information systems (EIS), designed to improve the performance of mineral exploration targeting.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.094
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 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

Citations30
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOre Geology ReviewsSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207