MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024686413 · doi:10.5539/apr.v7n2p83

Determination of Aquifer Position Using Electric Geophysical Method

2015· article· en· W2024686413 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
V. I. Obianwu, O. E. Atan, A. A. Okiwelu

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAquiferGeologyBoreholeLithologyAquifer propertiesBasementPopulationGroundwaterGeomorphologyHydrology (agriculture)PetrologyGeotechnical engineeringGroundwater recharge

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aquifer positions were determined by using Schlumberger electrode configuration to conduct Vertical Electrical Soundings in 67 communities within the study area. This study was carried out because of the presence of failed boreholes and manually dug wells in some of the Local Government Areas in the study area. More précis information relating to the exact location of aquifers is therefore needed for successful management of water resources in the area, in the face of dwindling availability of portable water, occasioned by failed boreholes and the need to carter for the increasing population of inhabitants of the area. Interpretation of data showed two to six geoelectric layers. Reflection coefficient and resistivity contrast values greater than 0.9 and 19 respectively, were obtained in some VES stations. Productive shallow and deep aquifer terrains were identified with depth of 60 m and 150 m respectively and resistivity range of 100.0-500.0 ?m for shallow aquifers and 1000-2500 ?m for deep aquifers, respectively. The lithologic materials for the aquifers were sand/sandstone and very coarsed grained sand/fractured basement, respectively. The above inference on lithology was constrained by borehole logs in the study area.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Physics ResearchSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207