MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969959858 · doi:10.1088/0266-5611/22/1/003

Electromagnetic source localization in shallow waters using Bayesian matched-field inversion

2005· article· en· W1969959858 on OpenAlexaff
Marius Birsan

Bibliographic record

VenueInverse Problems · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGibbs samplingInverse problemElectromagnetic fieldAttenuationBayesian probabilityBeamformingSource functionMathematicsInversion (geology)AcousticsMathematical analysisGeologyStatisticsPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The propagation of an electromagnetic signal in a marine environment cannot be modelled as a plane wave due to the high attenuation in seawater and the interactions with the ocean boundaries. Consequently, conventional beamforming techniques are not applicable for electromagnetic source localization. In this work, the Bayesian approach to matched-field processing is used to localize an electromagnetic source and estimate the environmental parameters. In this formulation, the solution to the inverse problem is given by the a posteriori probability distribution calculated here using the Gibbs sampling method. Bayesian inversion theory provides the formalism for estimating parameters, their uncertainties and verification of the estimates convergence. Two situations were investigated for the case where the single frequency measurements represent the magnitudes of two orthogonal horizontal electric field components: (1) all environmental parameters known and (2) unknown seabed conductivity. The objective function that relates the array data to the propagation model and environment parameters was chosen for the practical situation considered.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInverse ProblemsSame topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207