MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318695255 · doi:10.1515/jogs-2015-0013

Noise behavior in CGPS position time series: theeastern North America case study

2015· article· en· W2318695255 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geodetic Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGNSS positioning and interference
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersMinistère de l'Énergie et des Ressources Naturelles
KeywordsWhite noiseFlicker noiseNoise (video)AmplitudeFlickerColors of noiseRandom walkPosition (finance)Additive white Gaussian noiseStatisticsMathematicsPhysicsNoise figureComputer scienceTelecommunicationsOpticsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We analyzed the noise characteristics of 112 continuously operating GPS stations in eastern North America using the Spectral Analysis and the Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) methods. Results of both methods show that the combination ofwhite plus flicker noise is the best model for describing the stochastic part of the position time series. We explored this further using the MLE in the time domain by testing noise models of (a) powerlaw, (b)white, (c)white plus flicker, (d)white plus randomwalk, and (e) white plus flicker plus random-walk. The results show that amplitudes of all noise models are smallest in the north direction and largest in the vertical direction. While amplitudes of white noise model in (c–e) are almost equal across the study area, they are prevailed by the flicker and Random-walk noise for all directions. Assuming flicker noise model increases uncertainties of the estimated velocities by a factor of 5–38 compared to the white noise model.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.237 · 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