MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060798201 · doi:10.1190/1.1444805

The realizable resistive limit: A new concept for mapping geological features spanning a broad range of conductances

2000· article· en· W2060798201 on OpenAlexaff
Richard S. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsApotex (Canada)Apotex Pharmachem (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResistive touchscreenTime domainConductanceNonlinear systemLimit (mathematics)Ideal (ethics)Mathematical analysisPhysicsMathematicsComputer scienceLawCondensed matter physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The integral of the step response from zero time to infinite time (the ideal resistive limit) can be used to determine the conductance of the ground, in theory, because the former is directly proportional to the latter. However, in a real time-domain airborne electromagnetic (AEM) system, it is impossible to measure the step response, or the ideal resistive limit. This is because (1) the off time is finite, being interrupted by the next transmitter pulse; (2) the total effect of all previous transmitter pulses is to reduce the measured response; and (3) the process of removing the primary field during the on time removes a component of the secondary response that has the same shape as the primary response. With a real time-domain AEM system, it is possible to estimate what is defined as the realizable resistive limit (RRL). The RRL can also be calculated theoretically for a horizontal thin sheet of known conductance. Hence, the measured data can be input into a nonlinear inversion scheme and used to estimate an apparent conductance. RRL is calculated using on-time data, which is above the noise level between 0.001 S and 100 000 S, so it is possible to map conductances in this eight-decade range. Traditional methods for deriving conductance use off-time data only and are restricted to a much smaller range of values (i.e., about two decades). A field example illustrates that, within the resistive areas, the RRL map shows many structural features and lithologies that are not evident on the map of conductance derived using off-time data. Within the conductive areas, the RRL image shows greater variation; a number of geologically meaningful features are also apparent. Another advantage of RRL images is that artifacts associated with current migration near the edge of conductive features are not as evident as they are in the off-time-derived conductance images.

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations23
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207