MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118002000 · doi:10.1190/1.3494596

Application of the magnetic resonance sounding method to the investigation of aquifers in the presence of magnetic materials

2010· article· en· W2118002000 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Anatoly Legchenko, Jean‐Michel Vouillamoz, Jean Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNMR spectroscopy and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Institute of Technology Karnataka, SurathkalAgence Nationale de la RechercheBureau de Recherches Géologiques et MinièresPolytechnique MontréalUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
KeywordsAmplitudeDepth soundingMagnetic fieldMagnetiteEarth's magnetic fieldGeologySIGNAL (programming language)Vertical electrical soundingAquiferMagnetometerGeophysicsGroundwaterPhysicsComputer scienceOpticsGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract It has been previously reported that the magnetic resonance sounding (MRS) method does not produce reliable data in areas where magnetic rocks perturb the geomagnetic field. The applicability of the MRS can be extended by using the spin echo (SE) measuring technique instead of the commonly used measuring scheme based on recordings of the free induction decay (FID) signal. Modifications to the MRS method are presented for measuring and interpreting SE signals. Field results obtained in Cyprus (1999), Canada (2008), and India (2008) reveal that in test sites MRS measurements in the SE mode make it possible to apply the MRS method where the subsurface is composed of sand and gravel that contain magnetite or basalt and in aquifers composed of nonmagnetic sand overlying a magnetic basement. Con-sidering the widespread occurrence of magnetic rocks, this development increases the area where MRS can be applied. However, experience shows that it is more time consuming to measure the SE and more complicated to interpret the field data than it is to work with FID measurements. Numerical results show that the MRS method in the SE mode is less efficient than the FID technique because of the smaller amplitude and wider band of the SE signal. Due to instrumental limitations and unknown distribution of the magnetic fields within the investigated volume, accuracy of the presented MRS-SE approach is site dependent. In a general case, MRS-SE in its current implementation is not able to provide robust estimates of the initial amplitude, which renders MRS estimate of the water content qualitative. For accurate estimate of the water content, more sophisticated approaches need to be developed.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.172

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations47
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicNMR spectroscopy and applicationsFrench-language works237,207