MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069371183 · doi:10.1121/1.4809678

Bayesian geoacoustic inversion of single hydrophone light bulb data using warping dispersion analysis

2013· article· en· W2069371183 on OpenAlexaff
Julien Bonnel, Stan E. Dosso, N. Ross Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImage warpingInversion (geology)AcousticsGeologySeabedHydrophoneWaves and shallow waterAcoustic dispersionModal dispersionComputer scienceSeismologyPhysicsTelecommunicationsAcoustic wave

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents geoacoustic inversion of a light bulb implosion recorded during the Shallow Water 2006 experiment. The source is low frequency and impulsive, the environment is shallow water, and the acoustic signal is recorded using a single receiver. In this context, propagation is described by modal theory, and inversion is carried out by matching modal dispersion curves in the time-frequency domain. Experimental dispersion curves are estimated using an advanced signal processing method called warping, allowing inversion to be carried out at a relatively short range (~/=7 km). Moreover, the inversion itself is performed using Bayesian methodology. This allows inference of the seabed structure from the data, including the number of seabed layers resolved, optimal estimates of the seabed parameters, and quantitative uncertainty estimates. Inversion results of the experimental data are in good agreement with both ground truth and estimates from other experimental data in the same region.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.254
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 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

Citations100
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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