Slingram EMI Devices for Characterizing Resistive Features Using Apparent Conductivity Measurements: check of the DualEM‐421S Instrument and Field Tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article addresses the characterization of resistive archaeological targets and near surface structures by electromagnetic induction (EMI). It presents tests achieved with the DualEM‐421S instrument (Dualem Inc., Milton, Canada) in order to be able to quantitatively compare these measurements to the standard technique of direct‐current (d.c.) resistivity. The test was done over the Gallo‐roman site of Vieil‐Evreux in Normandy, France and one‐dimensional (1D) and three‐dimensional (3D) inversions were applied to the data set obtained. We have first investigated the signal‐to‐noise ratio of each of the six DualEM receiver coils both in a static mode and for a quad‐pulled system. The dependence on the roll angle was also measured and it is shown that rotation of DualEM must be taken into account if the roll angle is more than ±10°. Absolute calibration and in‐phase/quadrature (out of phase) component discrimination was checked by measuring the response of a small conductive and non‐magnetic sphere. Several electromagnetic soundings by measuring the instrument response at different heights were done in order to check the quadrature (out‐of‐phase) response of the instrument. Inversions of these electromagnetic soundings were compared to d.c. vertical electric soundings (VESs) over four locations and found in accordance. Several maps using different coil configurations (HCP, VCP, PERP) and different heights were performed and inverted, both for a wide mesh (5 m) and for a finer one (0.5 m). The wide mesh allows a global and rapid description of the surface geology context (continuous d.c. measurements cannot deliver equivalent depth of investigation). The fine mesh conductivity maps clearly show the walls of a fanum (temple) as well as other structures and prove that the DualEM‐421S is able to map correctly archaeological resistive targets. These maps and their interpretations were compared to previous results obtained by d.c. technique. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".