An evidence cycle
Each stage reduces uncertainty and informs the next. The method organizes available public data, geological observations, and field results without confusing an exploration hypothesis with a mineral reserve.
- Expand territorial understanding across scales.
- Prioritize areas through converging evidence.
- Validate hypotheses and recalibrate the next cycle.
Four movements
The method is not a rigid sequence. It is a cycle in which new evidence can revise priorities and return questions to earlier stages.
| # | What it shows | |
|---|---|---|
| 01 | Observe | Multispectral imagery, terrain models, and mapping help recognize patterns, structures, and regional contexts. |
| 02 | Integrate | Geological, geochemical, mineralogical, and territorial data are normalized and compared as complementary evidence. |
| 03 | Prioritize | Favorability is examined through convergence between independent signals, explicit criteria, and testable hypotheses. |
| 04 | Validate | Georeferenced observation, sampling, and laboratory analysis confront the hypothesis with the ground and feed the next iteration. |
Criteria at every stage
Technology expands analytical capacity. The method's quality depends on how evidence is interpreted, documented, and tested.
- Evidence before conclusion: No isolated signal determines a decision. Weight comes from convergence between independent sources.
- A target is not a reserve: The method keeps favorable areas, investigation targets, mineral resources, and reserves clearly distinct.
- Fieldwork closes the cycle: Digital hypotheses gain value when they can be confronted through observation, sampling, and analysis.
- Traceable decisions: Criteria, sources, and revisions remain visible so each priority can be understood and reassessed.