MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411205427 · doi:10.3390/min15060638

Metasomatic Mineral Systems with IOA, IOCG, and Affiliated Deposits: Ontology, Taxonomy, Lexicons, and Field Geology Data Collection Strategy

2025· article· en· W4411205427 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Louise Corriveau, Jean-François Montreuil, G Huot-Vézina, Olivier Blein

Bibliographic record

VenueMinerals · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of CanadaNatural Resources Canada
FundersCommission Géologique du Canada
KeywordsIron oxide copper gold ore depositsMetasomatismTaxonomy (biology)OntologyField (mathematics)GeologyMineral resource classificationGeochemistryMineralEarth scienceEpistemologyEcologyPaleontologyPhilosophyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metasomatic iron and alkali-calcic (MIAC) mineral systems form district-scale metasomatic footprints in the upper crust that are genetically associated with iron oxide–apatite (IOA), iron oxide and iron sulfide copper–gold (IOCG, ISCG), skarn, and affiliated critical and precious metal deposits. The development of MIAC systems is characterized by series of alteration facies that form key mappable entities in the field and along drill cores. Each facies can precipitate deposit types specific to the facies or host deposits formed at a subsequent facies. Defining the spatial and temporal relations between alteration facies and host rocks as well as with pre, syn, and post MIAC magmatic, tectonic, and mineralization events is essential to understanding the evolution of a MIAC system and to evaluating its overall mineral prospectivity. This paper proposes an ontology for MIAC systems that frames the key characteristics of the main alteration facies described and links it to a taxonomy and descriptive lexicons that allow the user to build an efficient data collection system tailored to the description of MIAC systems. The application developed by the Geological Survey of Canada for collecting field data is used as an example. The data collection system, including the application for collecting field data and the lexicons, are applicable to regional- and deposit-scale geological mapping as well as to drill core logging. They respond to the need for the metallogenic mapping of mineral systems and the development of more robust mineral prospectivity maps and exploration strategies for the discovery of critical and precious metal resources in MIAC systems.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMineralsSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207