MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127037110 · doi:10.1190/geo2012-0122.1

3D stochastic gravity inversion using nonstationary covariances

2013· article· en· W2127037110 on OpenAlexaff
Pejman Shamsipour, Denis Marcotte, Michel Chouteau, Martine Rivest, Abderrezak Bouchedda

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCovarianceInversion (geology)Synthetic dataRational quadratic covariance functionCovariance functionGeologyAlgorithmMathematicsComputer scienceApplied mathematicsCovariance intersectionStatisticsSeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The flexibility of geostatistical inversions in geophysics is limited by the use of stationary covariances, which, implicitly and mostly for mathematical convenience, assumes statistical homogeneity of the studied field. For fields showing sharp contrasts due, for example, to faults or folds, an approach based on the use of nonstationary covariances for cokriging inversion was developed. The approach was tested on two synthetic cases and one real data set. Inversion results based on the nonstationary covariance were compared to the results from the stationary covariance for two synthetic models. The nonstationary covariance better recovered the known synthetic models. With the real data set, the nonstationary assumption resulted in a better match with the known surface geology.

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)0.001
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations29
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207