Field observations and analysis data for rock samples from Kamativi, Zimbabwe, 2018
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dataset comprises geological field observations, whole-rock geochemical data (ICP-MS) and mineralogical data (XRD, SEM-EDS) for rock samples collected in and around the Kamativi area of Zimbabwe in October 2018. Samples of between 5 and 10 kilograms were collected in the field by a team of British Geological Survey (BGS) geologists. A set of polished thin sections was prepared at the BGS for mineralogical analysis undertaken by experienced analysts using SEM-EDS. A subset of samples was prepared at the BGS for whole-rock geochemical analysis by crushing and milling, the milled powders were sent to an accredited commercial laboratory in Canada for acid digestion and ICP-AES and ICP-MS analysis. A subsample of the powder was used for qualitative XRD analysis at the British Geological Survey. The data were collected to answer a research question about the ‘internal evolution of lithium pegmatites’ and how the mineralogy changes during cooling (i.e. crystallisation). Further details of the work can be found in READ_ME_information_about_analytical_methods_for_Kamativi_Zimbabwe.txt and in Shaw et al. (2022) - https://doi.org/10.3749/canmin.2100032
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.006 |
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".