MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054951000 · doi:10.1121/1.2934704

Bayesian tracking and geoacoustic inversion

2008· article· en· W2054951000 on OpenAlexaff
Stan E. Dosso, Michael J. Wilmut

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInverse problemInversion (geology)Bayesian probabilityUnderwater acousticsMarkov chain Monte CarloMarginal distributionComputer scienceMonte Carlo methodNonlinear systemSource trackingPosterior probabilityInverseUnderwaterAcousticsMathematicsRandom variableGeologyStatisticsArtificial intelligencePhysicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a Bayesian approach to two related inverse problems in underwater acoustics: localizing/tracking an acoustic source when ocean environmental properties are unknown, and determining environmental properties using acoustic data from an unknown (moving) source. The goal of this work is not simply to estimate values for source and/or environmental parameters, but to determine parameter uncertainty distributions, thereby quantifying the state of knowledge and information content of the inversion. A common formulation is applied for both problems in which source parameters (location and spectrum) and environmental parameters are considered unknown random variables constrained by noisy acoustic data and by prior information on parameter values (e.g., physical limits for environmental properties) and on inter-parameter relationships (limits on horizontal and vertical source speed). Given the strong nonlinearity of the inverse problem, marginal posterior probability densities are computed numerically using efficient Markov-chain Monte Carlo importance sampling methods. Source tracking results are represented by joint marginal probability distributions over range and depth, integrated over unknown environmental parameters. The approach is illustrated with two examples representing tracking a quiet submerged source and geoacoustic inversion using noise from an unknown ship-of-opportunity. In both cases, source, seabed, and water-column parameters are unknown.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207