Bibliographic record
Abstract
ZTEM data acquired across the Humble magnetic anomaly of almost 30,000 nT were analyzed for the presence of a magnetic gradient response and the effects from elevated magnetic susceptibilities.The response of moving the receiver coil through the magnetic-field gradient peaks at 0.01 Hz and drops off strongly with frequency. Lacking information about the field strength at the base station precludes the comparison of amplitudes between computed gradient responses and the survey data, but the comparison of response shapes suggests that the gradient responses are too small to have a noticeable effect on the survey data.The 3D inversion of the magnetic survey data indicates magnetic susceptibility values as high as 2.0 (SI). Forward-modeling the ZTEM response for these K-values combined with resistive half-spaces indicates that the response amplitudes and shapes strongly depend on the background resistivities. Ignoring the elevated K-values during an inversion can result in the underestimation of conductivities and other artifacts, such as the mapping of patterns that resemble crop circles. For an environment such as Humble, with deep-seated zones of elevated K-values, the shallow inverted conductivity structure appears to be reliable, but the deeper structure should be interpreted with caution.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".