Empirical mode decomposition (EMD) of potential field data: airborne gravity data as an example
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we introduce a newly developed method to process potential field data as an alternative to Fourier and wavelet based techniques. This new method is called Empirical Mode Decomposition (EMD) and was developed by Dr. Norden E. Huang at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (Huang et al. 1998). The EMD method is different from Fourier and wavelet transforms because it handles nonlinear and non‐stationary signals. The Fourier transform (FFT) is designed to work with linear and stationary signals. The wavelet transform, on the other hand, is well‐suited to handle non‐stationary data but poor at processing nonlinear data. Since potential field data are in general nonlinear and non‐stationary in nature we expect limitations in processing the data using FFT or wavelet methods. This work is therefore designed to test this new technique on potential field data using airborne gravity over the Turner Valley area in the foothills of Alberta, Canada.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".