MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063739321 · doi:10.1121/1.4787072

Assessment of atmospheric models for tele-infrasonic propagation

2005· article· en· W2063739321 on OpenAlexaff
Mihan H. McKenna, Sylvia Hayek

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicSeismic Waves and Analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfrasoundThermosphereEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyAtmosphere (unit)GeologyRemote sensingGround truthWind speedAtmospheric dynamicsGeophysicsIonosphereComputer sciencePhysicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Iron mines in Minnesota are ideally located to assess the accuracy of available atmospheric profiles used in infrasound modeling. These mines are located approximately 400 km away to the southeast (142) of the Lac-Du-Bonnet infrasound station, IS-10. Infrasound data from June 1999 to March 2004 was analyzed to assess the effects of explosion size and atmospheric conditions on observations. IS-10 recorded a suite of events from this time period resulting in well constrained ground truth. This ground truth allows for the comparison of ray trace and PE (Parabolic Equation) modeling to the observed arrivals. The tele-infrasonic distance (greater than 250 km) produces ray paths that turn in the upper atmosphere, the thermosphere, at approximately 120 km to 140 km. Modeling based upon MSIS/HWM (Mass Spectrometer Incoherent Scatter/Horizontal Wind Model) and the NOGAPS (Navy Operational Global Atmospheric Prediction System) and NRL-GS2 (Naval Research Laboratory Ground to Space) augmented profiles are used to interpret the observed arrivals.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.235 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicSeismic Waves and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207