MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104551679 · doi:10.1190/1.1543195

Okak Bay AMT data-set case study: Lessons in dimensionality and scale

2003· article· en· W2104551679 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alan G. Jones, Xavier García

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurse of dimensionalityGeologyBayScale (ratio)MagnetotelluricsConsistency (knowledge bases)GeophysicsData setDrillingRemote sensingMineralogyOceanographyComputer scienceCartographyMaterials scienceGeographyPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Electromagnetic (EM) exploration for base metals using the natural-source audio-magnetotelluric (AMT) technique has increased significantly during the last five years due to enhancements in all aspects of AMT and to the demand for imaging deeper than conventional controlled-source EM methods. However, regional currents induced by natural sources can be problematic in certain situations, and the appropriate interpretational dimensionality must be known. Herein we demonstrate that a two-dimensional (2D) interpretation is valid for a defined frequency band, but that the effects of large-scale three-dimensional (3D) structures must be considered at lower frequencies. Using an AMT dataset from an area located north of Voisey's Bay, Labrador, Canada, we analyse the responses to determine the appropriate dimensionality and to test them for internal consistency. Maps of the distortion-corrected data identify the lateral extent of connected conducting mineralization intersected by a drilling program. One-dimensional (1D) inversions of the corrected data from those sites on top of the mineralized zone show the resolution properties of the data. We constructed a pseudo-3D model from 2D inversions of the data in the frequency band 1000–10 Hz from all profiles, and this model images the mineralized body sufficiently for exploration purposes. We suggest that the anomalous low-frequency responses observed at sites close to the mineralized zone are possibly due to charges impinged on the mineralized body's boundaries by currents induced in the Atlantic Ocean some 50 km away. Although 3D numerical modeling studies exhibit some of the effects observed, we are unable to reproduce numerically the observed behavior.

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)0.001
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 score0.506
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations37
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207