MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046801175 · doi:10.5564/pmas.v0i4.45

Analysis of Infrasound Propagation at Regional Distance by Mining Explosion

2011· article· en· W2046801175 on OpenAlexaff
C. Bayarsaikhan, L Tungalag, Ch Lkhagvajav, Alexis Le Pichon

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEarthquake Detection and Analysis
Canadian institutionsBruyère
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfrasoundSeismologyGeologyRock blastingAcousticsMining engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seismic and acoustic recordings are particularly important to help identifying and locating industrial blasting sources. We have analyzed seismo-acoustic signals from mine blast for 2000 and 2005 in order to determine detection seismo-acoustic signals of explosion by seismic and infrasound stations. Several large mines in the region routinely generate explosions that are detected seismically and with infrasound. The mine range in distance from 40-500 km from the seismic, infrasound array. In last few years mining activity in Mongolia significantly increased. All events identified as quarry blasts have occurred during daytimes between 03:00 p.m. and 08:00 a.m. GMT and on weekdays from Monday to Friday. The corresponding number of infrasound detection is found to be dependent upon the regional weather condition, which is included air temperature, epicentral distance, wind force and velocity. We present the seismic and infrasound IMS stations and some results of analysis.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5564/pmas.v0i4.45 Proceedings of the Mongolian Academy of Sciences 2009 No 4 pp.42-52

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Mongolian Academy of SciencesSame topicEarthquake Detection and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207