MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088674018 · doi:10.1007/bf02828552

Least squares spectral analysis and its application to superconducting gravimeter data analysis

2004· article· en· W2088674018 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Spiros Pagiatakis

Bibliographic record

VenueGeo-spatial Information Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysics and Gravity Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGravimeterGeodetic datumFast Fourier transformNoise (video)GeodesySpectral analysisSampling (signal processing)Fourier analysisRemote sensingComputer scienceFourier transformAlgorithmPhysicsMathematicsGeologyGeophysicsTelecommunicationsMathematical analysisSpectroscopyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detection of a periodic signal hidden in noise is the goal of Superconducting Gravimeter (SG) data analysis. Due to spikes, gaps, datum shrifts (offsets) and other disturbances, the traditional FFT method shows inherent limitations. Instead, the least squares spectral analysis (LSSA) has showed itself more suitable than Fourier analysis of gappy, unequally spaced and unequally weighted data series in a variety of applications in geodesy and geophysics. This paper reviews the principle of LSSA and gives a possible strategy for the analysis of time series obtained from the Canadian Superconducting Gravimeter Installation (CGSD), with gaps, offsets, unequal sampling decimation of the data and unequally weighted data points.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.228 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations13
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeo-spatial Information ScienceSame topicGeophysics and Gravity MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207