Compatibility of high-altitude aeromagnetic and satellite-altitude magnetic anomalies over Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Results from equivalent-source distributions derived jointly from high-altitude (average 4 km) aeromagnetic and Magsat-derived (average 400 km) magnetic anomalies over Canada indicate that long-wavelength components (500–2500 km) in these fields are extremely compatible with one another (with a correlation coefficient of 0.95). The jointly estimated anomaly field at the earth's surface can be used as a long-wavelength adjustment surface for regional near-surface magnetic anomaly compilations and in assessing the performance of other downward-continuation techniques. Because near-surface anomalies are not available over all regions of the. world, we compare the jointly estimated anomaly field to the results of two different downward-continuation techniques: the evaluation of anomalies at the earth's surface from spherical harmonic coefficients derived from satellite-altitude data and the use of downward-continuation methods based on harmonic splines. Numerical and visual comparisons of these downward-continued fields with the jointly estimated anomaly field from the equivalent-source method indicate they are well correlated and could provide a useful method of deriving long-wavelength leveling surfaces for regional and worldwide magnetic anomaly maps.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".