MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135189369 · doi:10.1190/1.3429997

Cluster analysis of Euler deconvolution solutions: New filtering techniques and geologic strike determination

2010· article· en· W2135189369 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Hernan Ugalde, William A. Morris

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeophysical and Geoelectrical Methods
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical Centre
FundersOntario Centres of Excellence
KeywordsCluster analysisEuler's formulaAlgorithmComputationKernel (algebra)DeconvolutionComputer scienceData setEigenvalues and eigenvectorsKernel density estimationMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMathematical analysisStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Euler deconvolution often presents the problem of filtering coherent solutions from uncorrelated ones. We have applied clustering and kernel density distribution techniques to a Euler-generated data set. First a kernel density distribution algorithm filters uncorrelated Euler solutions from those consistently located near an anomalous magnetic-gravimetric source. Then a fuzzy c-means clustering algorithm is applied to the filtered data set. The computation of cluster centers reduces the size of the data set considerably, yet maintains its statistical consistency. Finally, the computation of eigenvectors and eigenvalues on the cluster centers yields an estimate of the geologic strike of the anomalous sources responsible for the observed geophysical anomalies. Therefore, we can obtain an improved strike and depth estimation of the magnetic sources. Although the algorithm can filter and cluster any Euler data set, we recommend obtaining the best solutions possible before any clustering. Hence, we have used a hybrid 3D extended Euler and 3D Werner deconvolution algorithm. We have developed synthetic and real examples from the Bathurst Mining Camp (New Brunswick, Canada). The output of this algorithm can be used as an input to any 3D geologic-modeling package.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations34
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysicsSame topicGeophysical and Geoelectrical MethodsFrench-language works237,207