MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022515375 · doi:10.1121/1.4786426

Acoustic surveillance for hazardous eruptions (ASHE)

2005· article· en· W2022515375 on OpenAlexaff
D. McCormack, Henry E. Bass, Milton Garcés, Hugo Yépes

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfrasoundVolcanoSeismologyGeologyExplosive eruptionExplosive materialVulcanian eruptionVolcanic hazardsVolcanic ashEnvironmental scienceWarning systemRemote sensingMeteorologyAcousticsComputer scienceMagmaTelecommunicationsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The potential of using infrasound to rapidly identify explosive volcanic eruptions has been discussed in the environmental acoustics and aviation safety communities for some time. The ability of sounds in the 0.01–10 Hz range to propagate for long distances with little attenuation suggests broad-area regional monitoring with a modest number of observing sites is possible. The ASHE experiment tests both the practical utility of infrasound as a regional-scale volcanic eruption detection tool, and the feasibility of using such an infrasound system to provide timely operational alerts to aviation through Volcanic Ash Advisory Centres (VAACs). Several infrasound arrays are deployed in a volcanic region, sending data in real time to a central detector, and onward to participating VAACs for comparison with existing warning systems. The ASHE experiment will determine if infrasound can complement both seismic and satellite observations to improve monitoring of volcanic hazard. Continuous acoustic surveillance can reduce the ambiguity between eruptive and purely seismic activity in an active volcano and provide additional estimates for the onset time of an eruption. The onset time estimates can be used as triggers for ash transport models.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207