The Accuracy of Water Table Elevation Estimates Determined from Ground Penetrating Radar Data
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Water table elevations measured at sparsely distributed monitoring wells are used to interpolate the water table surface. Ground-penetrating radar (GPR) is a non-invasive technique that has been used to estimate water table elevations between monitoring wells. GPR can be used to estimate the elevation of the top of the capillary fringe. The water table elevation is obtained by subtracting an estimate of the height of the capillary fringe from the capillary fringe elevation. The accuracy of these estimates is affected by numerous sources of error including surface elevation, GPR wave velocity, spatial velocity variations, capillary rise estimates and the time sampling interval. The main sources of uncertainty are due to GPR velocity estimates and predicting the height above the water table of the capillary fringe reflection. Theoretical analysis and field experiments indicate that, under favorable circumstances, the elevation of shallow water tables can be estimated with an accuracy on the order of 0.20m.
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 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 it