Influence of Local Site Conditions on the Reliability of Fundamental-Mode Surface Wave Inversion Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The development of reliable shear wave velocity (VS) profiles from surface wave velocity measurements requires compatibility between the measured and theoretical dispersion curves used in the inversion procedure. The most common approach in geotechnical applications is to use a fundamental-mode theoretical dispersion curve based on the assumption that the measured dispersion curve is representative of the fundamental mode of surface wave propagation. Analyses of low-frequency surface wave measurements presented in this paper show that this widespread assumption is invalid at low frequencies (long wavelengths) for some profile conditions. Results are presented from measurements performed at two deep soil sites in the central United States where surface wave analyses were performed using both the common fundamental-mode approach as well as an “effective-velocity” approach. At one site these two methods produced essentially the same estimate of the VS profile, while at the second site the estimated VS values at depth differed by more than 40 %. Using soil profile information for these sites and simulations of surface wave propagation, it is shown that the shallower depth to a higher-velocity formation at the second site created dominant higher-mode energy at wavelengths of 300–600 m, resulting in an overestimation of deep VS values.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".