MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Airborne gravity tests in the Italian area to improve the geoid model of Italy

2008· article· en· W2074992530 on OpenAlex
Riccardo Barzaghi, Alessandra Borghi, K. Keller, R. Forsberg, I. Giori, I. Loretti, A. V. Olesen, Lars Stenseng

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Prospecting · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGravimetryGeologyGeodesyGeoidCollocation (remote sensing)GravimeterGravitational fieldGravity anomalyFree-air gravity anomalyRemote sensingGeophysicsBouguer anomalyOil fieldGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Airborne gravimetry is an important method for measuring gravity over large unsurveyed areas. This technology has been widely applied in Canada, Antarctica and Greenland to map the gravity fields of these regions and in recent years, in the oil industry. In 2005, two tests in the Italian area were performed by ENI in cooperation with the Politecnico di Milano and the Danish National Space Center. To the knowledge of the authors, these were the first experiments of this kind in Italy and were performed over the Ionian coasts of Calabria and the Maiella Mountains. The Calabria test field is characterized by strong gravity variations due to the geophysical and topographic structure of the area. The ground gravity coverage is also quite dense. It was thus possible to compare airborne gravity with the ground observed values in order to check the precision of the airborne gravimetry. The second campaign was performed in an unsurveyed area centred on the Maiella Mountains, thus filling the data gap of this zone. Comparisons with existing ground data were also carried out in this area. After smoothing, the collected data have an accuracy of 2–3 mgal, as derived by cross‐over analysis. Moreover, the collocation method applied to compare and merge ground‐based and airborne data proved to be efficient and reliable. The standard deviation of the discrepancies between airborne data and collocation upward continued gravity is, in both cases, less than 8 mgal. In the Maiella test, the gravity field obtained by merging airborne and ground data using collocation also provides a more detailed description of the high‐frequency pattern of the geopotential field in this area.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.732

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.190 · 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