Effects of incoherent and coherent source spectral information in geoacoustic inversion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the effect on matched-field geoacoustic inversion of including source spectral information, as can be available in controlled-source acoustic surveys. Source information can consist of relative or absolute knowledge of the source amplitude and/or phase spectra, and can allow frequency-coherent processing of spatial acoustic-field data. A number of multi-frequency acoustic processors, appropriate for specific types of source information, are defined based on the likelihood function for complex acoustic-field data with Gaussian noise. The information content of the various processors is quantified in terms of marginal probability distributions and highest-probability density intervals for the unknown geoacoustic and geometric parameters, which define the accuracy expected in inversion. Marginal distributions are estimated using a fast Gibbs sampler approach to Bayesian inversion, which provides an efficient, unbiased sampling of the multi-dimensional posterior probability density. The analysis is illustrated for incoherent and coherent processors corresponding to several types of source knowledge ranging from complete information to no information, and the results are considered as a function of the spatial and frequency sampling of the acoustic fields.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".