MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312326593 · doi:10.1190/segam2012-0276.1

A multiple transmitter/receiver system: the advantage of summing responses from multiple transmitters

2012· article· en· W2312326593 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Scientific and Engineering Studies
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransmitterComputer scienceElectronic engineeringTelecommunicationsElectrical engineeringEngineeringChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many ground electromagnetic (EM) systems have been deployed in the Sudbury basin and under ideal conditions these systems are capable of detecting large conductors to depths of approximately 800m; however, more common detection limits are in the order of a couple of hundred meters (<400m). Although these systems have had great success in Sudbury, they may experience two weaknesses for deeper conductors: poor coupling and small signal-to-noise ratios, decreasing the quality and interpretability of the data. A time-domain electromagnetic survey was conducted over a known conductor to test a new methodology, which could potentially see deeper targets. The coupling weakness was addressed through multiple transmitter locations and the signal-to-noise ratio was increased above the noise threshold by spatial stacking of receiver measurements (from the various transmitter-receiver combinations).

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.249 · 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