MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049136717 · doi:10.1029/2001gl013778

Multi‐station infrasonic observations of two large bolides: signal interpretation and implications for monitoring of atmospheric explosions

2002· article· en· W2049136717 on OpenAlexaff
Peter Brown, Rodney W. Whitaker, Douglas O. ReVelle, E. Tagliaferri

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEarthquake Detection and Analysis
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfrasoundSatelliteAtmosphere (unit)Energy (signal processing)Environmental scienceEvent (particle physics)GeologySIGNAL (programming language)MeteorologyRemote sensingPhysicsAcousticsAstronomyAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Observations of two large bolides occurring over the Western Pacific on August 25, 2000 and April 23, 2001 are presented. These large bolides produced infrasonic signals at numerous stations in the Americas and Europe as well as being observed by US Department of Defence satellite sensors. The energy, location and physical characteristics of these bolides is inferred from available infrasound records and compared to satellite data. The infrasonic energy of the events from the observed signal frequencies is estimated to be 3 kT and 1 kT respectively, while the satellite energies are approximately 3 kT and 11 kT. The disagreement in energies for the April 23, 2001 (the third largest satellite observed bolide on record) event is significant and indicates acoustic/optical processes not typical of most bolides. The integrated infrasonic acoustic energy of the signals indicates that the percentage of acoustic energy deposited into the atmosphere is a minimum of ∼0.1–1% of the total source energy for each event.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.251 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicEarthquake Detection and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207