MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1574892705 · doi:10.1111/1365-2478.12188

Improved edge detection mapping through stacking and integration: a case study in the Bathurst Mining Camp

2014· article· en· W1574892705 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Prospecting · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStackingGeologyRegional geologyTelmatologyEconomic geologyEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionMetamorphic petrologyEnvironmental geologyGeochemistrySeismologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceChemistryTectonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Airborne geophysical surveys provide spatially continuous regional data coverage, which directly reflects subsurface petrophysical differences and thus the underlying geology. A modern geologic mapping exercise requires the fusion of this information to complement what is typically limited regional outcrop. Often, interpretation of the geophysical data in a geological context is done qualitatively using total field and derivative maps. With a qualitative approach, the resulting map product may reflect the interpreter's bias. Source edge detection provides a quantitative means to map lateral physical property changes in potential and non‐potential field data. There are a number of Source edge detection algorithms, all of which apply a transformation to convert local signal inflections associated with source edges into local maxima. As a consequence of differences in their computation, the various algorithms generate slightly different results for any given source depth, geometry, contrast, and noise levels. To enhance the viability of any detected edge, it is recommended that one combines the output of several Source edge detection algorithms. Here we introduce a simple data compilation method, deemed edge stacking, which improves the interpretable product of Source edge detection through direct gridding, grid addition, and amplitude thresholding. In two examples, i.e., a synthetic example and a real‐world example from the Bathurst Mining Camp, New Brunswick, Canada, a number of transformation algorithms are applied to gridded geophysical data sets and the resulting Source edge detection solutions combined. Edge stacking combines the benefits and nuances of each Source edge detection algorithm; coincident or overlapping and laterally continuous solutions are considered more indicative of a true edge, whereas isolated points are taken as being indicative of random noise or false solutions. When additional data types are available, as in our example, they may also be integrated to create a more complete geologic model. The effectiveness of this method is limited only by the resolution of each survey data set and the necessity of lateral physical property contrasts. The end product aims at creating a petrophysical contact map, which, when integrated with known lithological outcrop information, can be led to an improved geological map.

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.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.940
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.234 · 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