MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071018450 · doi:10.1190/1.1859698

Cone-based geophysical imaging: A proposed solution to a challenging problem

2005· article· en· W2071018450 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rosemary Knight, Adam Pidlisecky

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Leading Edge · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaBC Hydro
KeywordsGeophysical imagingGeophysicsCone (formal languages)GeologyComputer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are many locations throughout the world where subsurface contamination impacts the natural environment, with potentially serious consequences for the quality of our water and for human heath. At U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) sites alone there are estimated to be “about 6.4 billion cubic meters of contaminated soil, groundwater and other environmental media” (DOE Environmental Management Science Program announcement 02–03). One of the initial steps in dealing with a contaminated site is that referred to as site characterization. During site characterization, measurements are made that allow for the development of an accurate model of the physical, chemical, biological, and hydrogeological properties of the subsurface. Such a model is required to design an appropriate plan for remediation of a contaminated site and can also be used, and continually updated, for short-term or long-term monitoring of the site. Site characterization can involve locating and identifying a known or suspected contaminant, and can also involve determining the properties of the subsurface controlling the fate and transport of the contaminant. The challenging problem we face, at many sites, is identifying an approach to site characterization that provides the required information about the subsurface while minimizing the risks associated with contacting the contaminated 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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Leading EdgeSame topicGeophysical Methods and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207