MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Identification Of Uxo With Surface Magnetic Charges On A Sphere

2007· article· en· W2316884003 on OpenAlexaff
Nicolas Lhomme, Leonard R. Pasion, Douglas W. Oldenburg

Bibliographic record

Venue20th EEGS Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGeophysical Methods and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRADIUSRepresentation (politics)Object (grammar)Surface (topology)Unexploded ordnanceMagnetic dipoleInverse problemDipoleComputer sciencePhysicsArtificial intelligenceMathematicsMathematical analysisGeometryGeologyRemote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Discrimination of buried unexploded ordnance (UXO) with electro-magnetic sensors requires robust predictive models to correctly interpret data recorded at the surface. Shubitidze et al. have recently suggested a representation of the Electromagnetic Induction (EMI) response of a metallic object by using a model of Normalized Surface Magnetic Charges (NSMC) distributed on a spheroidal surface enclosing the target. Their results suggest that the Total Normalized Magnetic Charge (TNMC), the integral of NSMC over the spheroid, can be used to identify the object. The interpretation however is much simpli ed by using a sphere. Theoretical considerations show that the scattered eld of a spherical object is purely dipolar. The associated NSMC istribution is uniform on a sphere and the TNMC is directly related to the magnetization tensor and sphere radius. These concepts have impacted upon our approach where we estimate the charge distribution on the surface of the sphere by solving a linear inverse problem. An additional bene t of using a sphere instead of a spheroid is that it is no longer necessary to specify the orientation parameters of the buried object. Azimuth and dip are instead revealed in the recovered surface charge distribution. We nd that this formulation helps develop a robust NSMC that has potential for practical discrimination of UXO. We demonstrate our approach by using Geonics EM63 data collected at the USACE-ERDC test stand in Vicksburg, MS.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue20th EEGS Symposium on the Application of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental ProblemsSame topicGeophysical Methods and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207