MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110302715 · doi:10.1071/aseg2013ab256

Hybrid 1D/3D geologically constrained inversion of airborne TEM data

2013· article· pt· W2110302715 on OpenAlexaff
Peter K. Fullagar, Glenn Pears, James Reid

Bibliographic record

VenueASEG Extended Abstracts · 2013
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsMira Geoscience (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInversion (geology)GeologyHomogeneousConductivityGeophysicsComputer scienceSeismologyTectonicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TEM data are best interpreted in tight integration with geological data. A computer program, VPem1D, has been written to perform 1D TEM inversion in a 3D geological framework. The fact that VPem1D operates on a geological model is advantageous both because it reduces interpretational ambiguity and because it facilitates a variety of inversion styles. If one or more geological units are considered uniform in conductivity, the optimal conductivities can be determined for the entire survey area via homogeneous unit inversion. Moreover, because geological interfaces are captured in the model, geometry inversion can be used to adjust interfacial shape, hence define depth to basement for example. If conductivity varies within geological units, heterogeneous unit inversion can be applied.VPem1D inversion is directly applicable to data from variety of systems including (but not limited to) GEOTEM, TEMPEST, VTEM, Spectrem, SkyTEM, MegaTEM and Hoistem.This paper will illustrate the different inversion options as applied to a variety of case study data sets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASEG Extended AbstractsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207