Near‐surface shear wave reflection surveys in the Fraser River delta, B.C., Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PreviousNext No AccessSEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2000Near‐surface shear wave reflection surveys in the Fraser River delta, B.C., CanadaAuthors: J. B. HarrisR. D. MillerJ. XiaJ. A. HunterC. B. ParkD. R. LaflenR. L. GoodJ. B. HarrisMillsaps College, R. D. MillerKansas Geological Survey (KGS), J. XiaKansas Geological Survey (KGS), J. A. HunterGeological Survey of Canada (GSC), C. B. ParkKGS, D. R. LaflenKGS, and R. L. GoodGSChttps://doi.org/10.1190/1.1815642 SectionsAboutPDF/ePub ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InReddit Permalink: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1815642FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited bySome Remarks on Single-Channel and Multi-Channel Seismic in Offshore Engineering Geological Exploration1 December 2014 | Advanced Materials Research, Vol. 1065-1069Application of shallow shear-wave seismic reflection methods in earthquake hazards studiesJames B. Harris10 August 2010 | The Leading Edge, Vol. 29, No. 8Hammer-impact SH-wave seismic reflection methods in neotectonic investigations: General observations and case histories from the Mississippi Embayment, U.S.A.23 June 2009 | Journal of Earth Science, Vol. 20, No. 3 SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2000ISSN (print):1052-3812 ISSN (online):1949-4645Copyright: 2000 Pages: 2484 publication data© 2000 Copyright © 2000 Society of Exploration GeophysicistsPublisher:Society of Exploration Geophysicists HistoryPublished Online: 04 Jan 2005 CITATION INFORMATION J. B. Harris, R. D. Miller, J. Xia, J. A. Hunter, C. B. Park, D. R. Laflen, and R. L. Good, (2000), "Near‐surface shear wave reflection surveys in the Fraser River delta, B.C., Canada," SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts : 1327-1330. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1815642 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.008 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".