Benchmark workshop for geoacoustic inversion techniques in range dependent waveguides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper summarizes the results from the ONR/SPAWAR Geoacoustic Inversion Techniques (IT) Workshop held in May 2001. The format of the workshop was a blind test to estimate unknown geoacoustic profiles by inversion of synthetic acoustic field data for vertical and horizontal array geometries in range dependent shallow water waveguides. The fields were calculated using COUPLE/RAM for three range-dependent test cases: a monotonic slope; a shelf break; and an intrusion in the sediment. Geoacoustic profiles were generated to simulate sand, silt and mud sediment environments. Different approaches for inverting the field data were presented at the workshop: model-based methods based on normal modes, parabolic equation or ray theory; perturbative methods; methods using transmission loss (TL) data; methods using vertical or horizontal array data. The geoacoustic profiles inverted by the different methods are compared using a metric based on calculation of transmission loss using the estimated profiles for geometries and source frequencies that were not used in the inversion. The results demonstrate the effectiveness of present day inversion techniques, and indicate the limits of their capabilities in range dependent environments. [Work supported by ONR.]
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.004 |
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".