MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046444517 · doi:10.1117/12.462279

<title>3D radar response of a karstic zone</title>

2002· article· en· W2046444517 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoreholeGround-penetrating radarGeologyKarstRadarGypsumRemote sensingMining engineeringGeotechnical engineeringGeomorphologyComputer scienceTelecommunicationsPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The exploitation of limestone and gypsum quarries is often complicated by the presence of waste-filled karstic zones. The capabilities of GPR to quickly delineate the economic material are studied. Surface radar data collected in a gypsum quarry are presented. These data provide limited information due to poor radar penetration and the presence of abundant diffraction patterns of ambiguous origin. Borehole GPR surveys are considered to delineate the karstic zone. Surface and borehole radar data are first synthesized numerically to seek optimal acquisition parameters. We use Carcione and Schoenberg (2000) modeling code, in which the 3D staggered grid pseudospectral operator is implemented. Modeling results show that minimally processed borehole and borehole-surfaced ata provide valuablea nd otherwise inaccessible information. The numerical simulations have also revealed limitations of the modeling code which requires further improvement.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.447
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.216 · 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