MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084913905 · doi:10.1109/joe.2005.862127

Estimates of geoacoustic model parameters from inversions of horizontal and vertical line array data

2005· article· en· W2084913905 on OpenAlexaff
Dag Tollefsen, Michael J. Wilmut, Ross Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyInversion (geology)BroadbandReplicaHorizontal line testSeismic arrayWaves and shallow waterAcousticsSimulated annealingSeismologyComputer scienceOceanographyAlgorithmTelecommunicationsPhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes results from geoacoustic inversion of low-frequency acoustic data recorded at a receiving array divided into two sections, a sparse bottom laid horizontal array (HLA) and a vertical array (VLA) deployed in shallow water. The data are from an experiment conducted by the Norwegian Defence Research Establishment (FFI) in the Barents Sea, using broadband explosives (shot) sources. A two-layer range-independent geoacoustic model, consistent with seismic profiles from the area, described the environment. Inversion for geoacoustic model parameters was carried out using a fast implementation of the hybrid adaptive simplex simulated annealing (ASSA) inversion algorithm, with replica fields computed by the ORCA normal mode code. Low-frequency (40-128 Hz) data from six shot sources at ranges 3-9 km from the array were considered. Estimates of sediment and substrate p-wave velocities and sediment thickness were found to be consistent between independent inversions of data from the two sections of the array

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)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations15
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Oceanic EngineeringSame topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207