Comparing Shear-Wave Velocity Profiles from MASW with Borehole Measurements in Unconsolidated Sediments, Fraser River Delta, B.C., Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent field tests illustrate the accuracy and consistency of estimating near-surface shear (S) wave velocities calculated using Multi-channel Analysis of Surface Wave (MASW). To evaluate the technique in a variety of near-surface conditions and through a wide range of velocities, MASW-derived S-wave velocity profiles (S-wave velocity vs. depth) were statistically compared to S-wave velocity profiles measured in seven boreholes in the unconsolidated sediments of the Fraser River delta, near Vancouver, B.C., Canada. An overall difference of approximately 15 percent was observed between these two uniquely determined sets of S-wave velocities from the seven well locations. A blind test of the standalone accuracy of MASW was conducted at an eighth well. For this blind test, S-wave velocity measurements made in and interpreted from the borehole were not made available during MASW data processing. Differences between S-wave velocities using MASW from those measured in the blind test borehole averaged nine percent. No systematic differences between these results were observed in data from any of the eight test sites. The MASW method provided reliable S-wave velocity profiles from 2to30meters below the ground surface at some sites in the Fraser delta.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".