Bibliographic record
Abstract
S EG's second decade began with a clear signal that applied geophysics had evolved into a mature scientific discipline—the nearly simultaneous appearance of three text books by widely recognized experts (Exploration Geophysics by J.J. Jakowsky, Geophysical Exploration by C.A. Heiland, and Geophysical Prospecting for Oil by L.L. Nettleton). The page count of these three books was an indication of just how fast and how far geophysics had advanced in the 16 years since the first time that a geophysical survey had led to the discovery of commercial quantities of petroleum. Nettleton's book (perhaps because it was limited to oil exploration) was the runt of the litter at a mere 650 pages. Jakowsky's book was 786 pages and included a list of patents at the end of each chapter (interestingly, patents had already been granted in the USA, UK, Canada, France, and USSR). The book by Heiland, the leading geophysical educator of the time in the United States, was a gargantuan 1013 pages and that drew both praise and criticism in the review by E.A. Eckhardt which appeared in the January 1941 issue of Geophysics:
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".