MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985607058 · doi:10.1190/1.1816374

Fast 3‐D inversion of multi‐source array electromagnetic data collected for mineral exploration

2001· article· en· W1985607058 on OpenAlexaffabout
E. Tartaras, Michael S. Zhdanov, S. J. Balch

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsVale (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInversion (geology)GeologyMineral explorationElectromagneticsGeophysicsComputer scienceSeismologyElectronic engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PreviousNext No AccessSEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2001Fast 3‐D inversion of multi‐source array electromagnetic data collected for mineral explorationAuthors: Efthimios TartarasMichael ZhdanovStephen BalchEfthimios TartarasDepartment of Geology and Geophysics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, Michael ZhdanovDepartment of Geology and Geophysics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, and Stephen BalchINCO Technical Services Limited, Copper Cliff, Ontario, Canada P0M 1N0https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1816374 SectionsAboutPDF/ePub ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail Permalink: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1816374FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2001ISSN (print):1052-3812 ISSN (online):1949-4645Copyright: 2001 Pages: 2135 publication data© 2001 Copyright © 2001 Society of Exploration GeophysicistsPublisher:Society of Exploration Geophysicists HistoryPublished: 03 Jan 2005 CITATION INFORMATION Efthimios Tartaras, Michael Zhdanov, and Stephen Balch, (2001), "Fast 3‐D inversion of multi‐source array electromagnetic data collected for mineral exploration," SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts : 1439-1442. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1816374 Plain-Language Summary PDF DownloadLoading ...

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 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)0.000
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 score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations3
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207