MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101665114 · doi:10.1190/1.3464325

Inference of lithologic distributions in an alluvial aquifer using airborne transient electromagnetic surveys

2010· article· en· W2101665114 on OpenAlexaff
Jesse E. Dickinson, D. R. Pool, R. W. Groom, L. J. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsPetro-Canada
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyDepartment of Water Resources
KeywordsGeologyLithologyAquiferElectrical resistivity and conductivitySiltBoreholeAlluviumGeomorphologyMineralogyGroundwaterGeotechnical engineeringPetrology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An airborne transient electromagnetic (TEM) survey was completed in the Upper San Pedro Basin in southeastern Arizona to map resistivity distributions within the alluvial aquifer. This investigation evaluated the utility of 1D vertical resistivity models of the TEM data to infer lithologic distributions in an alluvial aquifer. Comparisons of the resistivity values and layers in the 1D resistivity models of airborne TEM data to 1D resistivity models of ground TEM data, borehole resistivity logs, and lithologic descriptions in drill logs indicated that the airborne TEM identified thick conductive fine-grained sediments that result in semiconfined groundwater conditions. One-dimensional models of ground-based TEM surveys and subsurface lithology at three sites were used to determine starting models and constraints to invert airborne TEM data using a constrained Marquardt-styleunderparameterized method. A maximum structural resolution of six layers underlain by a half-space was determined from the resistivity structure of the 1D models of the ground TEM data. The 1D resistivity models of the airborne TEM data compared well with the control data to depths of approximately 100m in areas of thick conductive silt and clay and to depths of 200m in areas of resistive sand and gravel. Comparison of a 3D interpolation of the 1D resistivity models to drill logs indicated resistive (mean of 65ohm-m) coarse-grained sediments along basin margins and conductive (mean of 8ohm-m) fine-grained sediments at the basin center. Extents of hydrologically significant thick silt and clay were well mapped by the 1D resistivity models of airborne TEM data. Areas of uncertain lithology remain below conductive fine-grained sediments where the 1D resistivity structure is not resolved: in areas where multiple lithologies have similar resistivity values and in areas of high salinity.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.766
Threshold uncertainty score0.495

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations24
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207