MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408968650 · doi:10.1007/s11053-024-10451-0

Mineral Prospectivity Modeling of Graphite Deposits and Occurrences in Canada

2025· article· en· W4408968650 on OpenAlex
Steven E. Zhang, C J M Lawley, Julie E. Bourdeau, Mohammad Parsa, Renato Cumani, Aaron Thompson

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNatural Resources Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
FundersNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsProspectivity mappingMineral resource classificationMineralGeologyGeochemistryGraphiteMining engineeringPaleontologyMetallurgyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Exploration for graphite in Canada is of economic, strategic and governance priority. In this study, we aimed to develop a reliable prospectivity map for graphite in Canada. Our approach mitigated multiple sources of workflow-induced uncertainty by propagating uncertainty due to the selection of negative labels, machine learning algorithms, feature space dimensionality, and hyperparameter tuning metrics. By averaging an ensemble of de-correlated models, we produced a single-merged model that clearly represents propagated uncertainty through a consensus map and an uncertainty map. These maps adhere to the metrological convention of "result plus/minus associated uncertainty" and are intuitive to use. Our ensemble demonstrated robustness, quickly converging to the consensus model, suggesting that new mineral prospectivity mapping (MPM) products using the same data would unlikely perturb our consensus model’s coverage. We conducted a maximally double-blind study, avoiding geoscientific knowledge during model generation to ensure impartial post-hoc analysis and interpretation. Therefore, our MPM products complement geoscientific knowledge-based exploration, because the targeting information provided in our MPM products constitute a maximally independent source. Our MPM products showed excellent spatial variability, aligning with existing knowledge of graphite deposits in Canada, indicating that combining data-driven rigor with independent interpretation enhances the robustness of our MPM products. Consequently, we believe our MPM products could effectively guide regional exploration of natural graphite in Canada.

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.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.592

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.273 · 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