MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079027877 · doi:10.4043/24621-ms

Application of Ground Penetrating RADAR for Profiling and Bathymetric Survey of Shallow Frozen

2014· article· en· W2079027877 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
R.C. Cross, W.J. Lee, R. Poeckert

Bibliographic record

VenueOTC Arctic Technology Conference · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround-penetrating radarBathymetryGeologySonarRemote sensingHydrographic surveyRadarIsopach mapGeomorphologyGeodesyOceanographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) was used to survey the bathymetry and sub-bottom features of a frozen lake in Ontario, Canada. A 50 MHz GPR measured the lake depth to a maximum of 24 meters. Sub-bottom features and sediment thickness were simultaneously observed and recorded with the GPR. Single beam sonar hydrographic surveying methods were applied to the data acquisition process and quality control procedures. Quality control checks revealed a vertical accuracy of approximately 0.25 meters while the horizontal positional accuracy was approximately 0.1 meters through the use of Real-time Kinematic (RTK) GPS. A contoured bathymetric map was generated from the data set as well as an isopach of sediment thickness. GPR is demonstrated to be effective for measuring water depth, ice thickness, and sub-bottom features of ice covered lakes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.264
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOTC Arctic Technology ConferenceSame topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207