MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409107127 · doi:10.3390/min15040372

Machine Learning Classification of Fertile and Barren Adakites for Refining Mineral Prospectivity Mapping: Geochemical Insights from the Northern Appalachians, New Brunswick, Canada

2025· article· en· W4409107127 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Amirabbas Karbalaeiramezanali, Fazilat Yousefi, David R. Lentz, Kathleen G. Thorne

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerals · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickGovernment of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNew Brunswick Innovation FoundationUniversity of New Brunswick
KeywordsProspectivity mappingGeochemistryGeologyMineral resource classificationMineralRefining (metallurgy)Mineral explorationMining engineeringEarth scienceEcologyGeomorphologyBiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study applies machine learning (ML) techniques to classify fertile [for porphyry Cu and (or) Au systems] and barren adakites using geochemical data from New Brunswick, Canada. It emphasizes that not all intrusive units, including adakites, are inherently fertile and should not be directly used as the heat source evidence layer in mineral prospectivity mapping without prior analysis. Adakites play a crucial role in mineral exploration by helping distinguish between fertile and barren intrusive units, which significantly influence ore-forming processes. A dataset of 99 fertile and 66 barren adakites was analyzed using seven ML models: support vector machine (SVM), neural network, random forest (RF), decision tree, AdaBoost, gradient boosting, and logistic regression. These models were applied to classify 829 adakite samples from around the world into fertile and barren categories, with performance evaluated using area under the curve (AUC), classification accuracy, F1 score, precision, recall, and Matthews correlation coefficient (MCC). SVM achieved the highest performance (AUC = 0.91), followed by gradient boosting (0.90) and RF (0.89). For model validation, 160 globally recognized fertile adakites were selected from the dataset based on well-documented fertility characteristics. Among the tested models, SVM demonstrated the highest classification accuracy (93.75%), underscoring its effectiveness in distinguishing fertile from barren adakites for mineral prospectivity mapping. Statistical analysis and feature selection identified middle rare earth elements (REEs), including Gd and Dy, with Hf, as key indicators of fertility. A comprehensive analysis of 1596 scatter plots, generated from 57 geochemical variables, was conducted using linear discriminant analysis (LDA) to determine the most effective variable pairs for distinguishing fertile and barren adakites. The most informative scatter plots featured element vs. element combinations (e.g., Ga vs. Dy, Ga vs. Gd, and Pr vs. Gd), followed by element vs. major oxide (e.g., Fe2O3T vs. Gd and Al2O3 vs. Hf) and ratio vs. element (e.g., La/Sm vs. Gd, Rb/Sr vs. Hf) plots, whereas major oxide vs. major oxide, ratio vs. ratio, and major oxide vs. ratio plots had limited discriminatory power.

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)0.001
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 score0.425
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineralsSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207