Dielectric permittivity of natural salt rock contaminated with clay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fact that ground penetrating radar (GPR) pulses propagate through dry salt with little attenuation has been exploited to probe salt formations since the mid-seventies of the last century (Unterberger and Stewart 1975; Unterberger 1976; Annan, Davis et al. 1979) Consequently, the ability of high frequency GPR to detect feature of few cm in thickness makes it a good technique for mapping anomalies in Potash mines. One particular interest in that environment is avoiding thin ‘clay’ layers, which, if cut too close to, can influence the safety and stability of the underground workings. To help in interpreting ground penetrating radar data, a clear understanding of the factor causing the reflection is essential; knowing why a reflection disappears is just as important as understanding the reflection itself. This is better understood if samples from the zones of reflections are characterized in terms of their complex permittivity and chemical and geometrical composition. In this contribution, we measure the dielectric properties of mixtures of halite with other primarily evaporite minerals taken directly from recently sampled core. We find substantial wave speed and attenuation dispersion in these mixtures that may result from the enhanced conductivity due to clay minerals.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".