MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045926009 · doi:10.1190/1.2435171

Correlation between near-surface electromagnetic soil parameters and early-time GPR signals: An experimental study

2007· article· en· W2045926009 on OpenAlexaff
Elena Pettinelli, G. Vannaroni, Barbara Di Pasquo, Elisabetta Mattei, Andrea Di Matteo, Alberto De Santis, Peter Annan

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsStemSoft Software (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround-penetrating radarReflectometrySubsoilTime domainRadarAmplitudeGeologyEnvelope (radar)PermittivitySoil scienceAcousticsRemote sensingGeophysicsMaterials scienceComputer sciencePhysicsSoil waterOpticsTelecommunicationsDielectric

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We explore a new approach to evaluate the effect of soil electromagnetic parameters on early-time ground-penetrating radar (GPR) signals. The analysis is performed in a time interval which contains the direct airwaves and ground waves, propagating between transmitting and receiving antennas. To perform the measurements we have selected a natural test site characterized by very strong lateral gradient of the soil electrical properties. To evaluate the effect of the subsoil permittivity and conductivity on the radar response we compare the envelope amplitude of the GPR signals received in the first 12ns within 4ns-wide windows, with the electrical properties (εr and σDC) determined using time-domain reflectometry (TDR). The results show that the constitutive soil parameters strongly influence early-time signals, suggesting a novel approach for estimating the spatial variability of water content with GPR.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations64
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicGeophysical Methods and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207