MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7018937265

En analys och tolkning av Geoscience BC TREKprojektets geokemiska och mineralogiska morändata för att fastställa den geokemiska karaktären av Au-Ag-Cu-Mo-mineralisering på Nechakoplatån, British Columbia, Kanada

2016· article· en· W7018937265 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBedrockPleistoceneMineral explorationMineral resource classificationCretaceousPlateau (mathematics)Geological surveyGeologic map
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mineral exploration in the interior of British Columbia is challenged by an extensive coverage of glacial sediments. The Geoscience British Columbia (GBC) Targeting Resources through Exploration and Knowledge (TREK) Survey has since 2013 collected till samples in the northern interior plateau of British Columbia, covering an area of approximately 25,000km2. The TREK area is largely covered by Miocene to Pleistocene age volcanic rocks that are underlain by older volcanic, sedimentary, and intrusive rocks of the Stikine Terrane, and also to a smaller extent in the east by rocks of the Cache Creek Terrane. Previous surficial mapping to aid mineral exploration has determined that the Pleistocene ice sheet advances have been mainly to the east-northeast. The British Columbia Geological Survey (BCGS) MINFILE database includes five developed prospects, seven prospects and 39 mineral showings in the TREK Project area. Styles of mineralization include late Cretaceous and Eocene epithermal Au and Ag deposits (e.g., Blackwater-Davidson, Capoose, Wolf, and 3T’s), lower Cretaceous sediment-hosted Carlin-type deposits (e.g. Bob) and Jurassic to Eocene porphyry Cu and Mo deposits (e.g., Endako and Chu). This report analyzes and interprets till digital data from three TREK Geoscience BC reports and one BCGS Open File to determine if there is a mineralogical and geochemical signature in the till of buried bedrock mineralization. Through statistical analysis, including scatter plots, probability plots, and box plots, populations of key ore indicators and pathfinder elements are compared, thresholds are established and anomalous samples queried. Spatial plots of samples with known pathfinder elements e.g. Au, Ag, Cu, and Mo values above established thresholds are created and compared with heavy mineral till concentrates such as pyrite and cinnabar. Major oxide element ratios from till sample whole rock analysis were also analyzed to identify hydrothermal alteration associated with the mineralization. The analysis has demonstrated that anomalous values reflect known bedrock mineralization and that there are two areas within the study area that do not appear to be related to already known mineral occurrences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.307
Threshold uncertainty score0.618

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.013

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology)Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207