MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2107812028 · doi:10.1109/joe.2008.924553

Parameter Estimate Biases in Geoacoustic Inversion From Neglected Range Dependence

2008· article· en· W2107812028 on OpenAlexafffund
Michael G. Morley, Stan E. Dosso, N. Ross Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsInversion (geology)Range (aeronautics)SeabedBayesian probabilityMarginal distributionUnderwater acousticsGeologyEstimation theoryStatisticsAcousticsStatistical physicsMathematicsRandom variableUnderwaterPhysicsSeismologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper shows that neglecting environmental range dependence in matched-field inversion (MFI) results in biased theory errors that lead to biased geoacoustic parameter estimates using standard inversion methods. Two approaches are used to investigate this issue. The first considers the distribution of optimal parameter estimates obtained from a large number of range-independent inversions of synthetic data generated for random range-dependent environments. The second applies Bayesian inversion and computes marginal uncertainty distributions for geoacoustic parameters, neglecting environmental range dependence. Both hard- and soft-bottom environments are considered at a number of scales of lateral variability for water depth and seabed sound speed. While the use of multifrequency data reduces the variability of the parameter estimates, it does not generally reduce parameter biases and increases biases in some cases. The biases appear to result from additional losses in range-dependent propagation, which are compensated for in range-independent inversion by adjusting geoacoustic parameters to decrease the seabed reflection coefficient. The effects of range dependence differ for different environments, with the soft-bottom case sensitive to range-dependent sound speed and the hard-bottom case sensitive to range-dependent water depth.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.456

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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